VOL. 4 PRELIMINARY UNEDITED TRANSCRIPT HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY FOR THE PERIOD: 3:00p.m. -6:00p.m. THURSDAY, MAY 10, 1979 NO. 29

Nay 10, 1979 The House met at 3:00 P.M. Mr. Speaker in t.'le Chair. MR. SPEAKER: (Ottenheimer) Tape No. 1196 SD - l Order, please~ STATEi•lENTS BY HINISTERS MR. SPEAKER: MR. J. DINN: i:lon. Hir..i.ster for Labour and Manpower. Mr. Speaker, I wish to inform the hon. House of the developments and progress being made by my department respecting the dust problems in the Labrador City/Wabush area. In addressing this problem, Mr.

Speaker, I believe it is necessary to first make reference to the various studies, inquiries and commissions which have been established to investigate a variety of issues and problems in Labrador. I am aware of twelve studies, inquiries or commissions which have been established since 1972 and which in one way or another relate generally or specifically to the Labrador West area.

As the hon. members will see,only one of these studies, which I will describe, directly acdresses the dust problem which is presently of such great concern to all residents in the Labrador City/Wabush area and which,I may add,Government is committed to resolve with the greatest dispatch. The report to which I make specific reference is known as the Windish Report and the study was carried out in 1975 at the request of the Department of ~lines and Energy to reassess the health hazards existing in the mining operations of the Iron Ore Company of Canada at Labrador City.

This report concluded that serious dust problems did exist in both the concentrator and pellet plant and that a major dust control program should be instituted by the company. The other eleven inquiries and commissions were set up to consider various problems which directly or indirectly affect residents of the Labrador City/Wabush area. 31.15

:-lay 101 1979 Tape NO. 1196 so - 2 !•l.R. J. OINN: In 1972 the Morqan I:'IC!ustrial Ir.quiry Commission into conclusions of collective aqree.'Uents between USWA-IOCC was esta.bll.shed and also c..l-,e Snowden ~yal Commission on Labrador studied economic ane sociological cor..di t.ions of life in Labrador . In 1973 the Neary Royal Comro~ssion on illegal work stoppages ~nvestic;at:ed t.he number of l.llegal :.'Orlt stoppages t:hro..:ghouc the Province. Also in 1973 a ~yal Commission on :t~neral Revenue r eported on all aspects of revenue derived from the mineral indust...ry in the Province . 31.:1.6 ..

May 10, 1979 Tape No. 1197 DW - l MR. J. DINN: In 1974 a study was carried out on the possibility of elected municipal government for the Labrador City/Wabush area. In 1975 the Woolridge Industrial Inquiry Commission was established to resolve differences between the United Steelworkers of America,Local 6285 and Wabush Mines in an effort to conclude a new collective agreement and settle a strike. Also in 1975 the Easton Industrial Commission was established to look into all aspects of industrial relations between the United Steelworkers of America, Local 5795 and the Iron Ore Company of Canada.

In 1976 a ?.uman Rights Commission reviewed and reported on alleged discriminatory practices of the Iron Ore company of canada in employment status of six employees of the company. In 1977 the Bartlett Industrial Commission of Inquiry studied employment problems in the Labrador City/Wabush area,including the practice of contract­ ing out. Also in 1977 the Mccarthy Royal Commission was established to investigate and report on three industrial accidents leading to fatality at the Iron Ore Company of Canada operations in Labrador City.

Presently an Industrial COmmission of Inquiry is studying the contracting out policies of Wabush or Scully Mines which led to a wild-cat strike in 1978. As the han. members will note, none of these inquiries or commissions described above have come to grips with the serious problems which prevail both in the Iron Ore Company of Canada operations, or to a lesser extent the Wabush Mines operations in the communities of Labrador City/Wabush. The question which must be answered is whether or not the engineering efforts carried out by the Iron Ore Company of canada during the past several years have 3117

May 10, 1979 Tape NO . 1197 ow - 2 11R . J • DINN : achieved sufficie~t dust level ~eductions, and for this reason government feels it is necessary t:hat immediate steps be 'taken t:o once and for all identify the causes of t.'le dust problems in the area and to ir..itiate the nec.essary action to correct these problems.

According~y. a programme of action has been developed and approved by Executive COuncil which should fully identify the dust: problems and sources and recommend the necessary corrective action which must be taken . .. _ In additiof\'! to this program I have initiated procedures for consultat:ion wi~'l ~~agement and labour which wi~l fac~it:at:e the implementation of t.'le action prograrnn:e · ...,hich I will outline as follows: {i) 1v1 independent body be appointed to co-ordinate a comprehensive st.udy int;:, the dust 'Problems at thE Iron Ore Company of canada operations in Labrador City ; 31.18

!·lay 10, 1979 HR. OINN: Tape No. 1198 NM - 1 (ii) an independent consulcant be engaged to analyse dust level monitoring t:echniq~es a.r:d results of casts conduct:ed bot:~ by gover~ent and the Iron Ore Company of Canada; (iii) ehe independe~t body referred to in (

i) above to ~range for an independent engineering study il the Iron o::::e Company of Canada engin .eering efforts have :~ct: ach;:eved suf:id.er:t d1;sc le~·cl reduct:ions; (iv) an ~dependent: consultanc unde r t:ake a medical reassessmenc ot workers having report:ed ~iagnosed cases of dust: relat:ed diseases; (

v) a.n independent: ambient air survey of the a::::ea be undertaken; (vi ) a communit:y heal~~ study oe ~~dert:aken by specialized consultants, with special reference to respiratory diseases; and (vii) if , as a result oi the independent ambient air st:udy referred to in (

v) and the commun~ty health study reierred co in (vi) a health hazard is r ecognized, a complete engineering scudy of all dusc sources .L~ the area be undert~e.'l ::o enable che design of controlled equipment:. With respecc to the procedur es to i~~~diately co!Mience the 7- Piont Pro<]l'amme, I have established two senior management: commitcees. For che Iron Ore Company of Canada opera&Lons in Labrador Cicy, the COOIIIIitcee will include :tr. 3rian Mulroney, !'resident 3tl9

~lay 10, :979 !·L'L DINN: Preside nt of Tape No. 1198 NM - 2 o£ tl:e Iron Ore Company of Ca."!ada; :<1r . Le~ L<:yte, Local 5795 , Unit:ed Steelworkers of American, Labr ador \..i t:y and myseLf 1anci a sim:u.ar coi!II!Ut:t:ee co aaru;ess proo.!.ems relatins to the Wa.bush !'.ine s operation Will include 'Mr. ~li. Uiam )tuloin, General Manag=, 1</abus~ !•tines; l'.r . Cal Luedee, Presided : of Loca 62$5, United Steel workers of American, Wabush and myself .

The purpose of the senior management committees is to ensure that a co- ordinated effort is made on ~~e part of management:, labour and gove :::-nmem: in implementing t:t<: 7- ?oint: ?rogramme and to develop cost sharing arrangements respecting the comprehensive assessment of the dust problems .

In addition to t:he senior manag€ment committ:ee , two senior offi cial s committees have been est:ablished to deal with the separate problems at Iron Ore Company of Canada and lllabush ~tines operations , aoth ~nagement: and labour at the Iron Ore Company of Canada and Wabush operations will be asked t:o appoint two senior represent:atives to these committees to work with officials of my depa::tme.'lt in developing der,ailed pro;>osals respecting the 7-po int programme for c~nsideration and approval by the senior management committee . 3:1ZO

May 10, 1979 Tape 1199 Mr. Dinn: I might say that the representation from my department will be re-enforced as necessary by officials from the appropriate Provincial and Federal Government departments ~n whose jurisdiction a particular aspect of the problem rests. I am pleased to inform the hon. members that meetings of the Senior Management Comrnittee,of which I am a member, have already commenced and the Offici-als Committee will hold its first meeting on May 21, 1979 in Labrador City-Wabush.

I am hopeful that the 5fficials Committee will submit recommendations respecting the implementation of the 7- Point Programme at an early date. In addition to this 1 I am pleased to inform the PK - 1 hon. members that government has approved the appointment of a resident Regional Mines Inspector for Labrador City-Wabush and one additional Mines Technician for a total of three full-time positions to specifically deal with the Iron Ore Company of Canada-Wabush mining operations.

I believe the establishment of an adequate mines inspection team in the area is a forward step which should contribute greatly to the identification and prevention of problems which occur in mining operations in Labrador City-Wabush. I want to stress to the hen. members that the 7- Point Action Programme which I have outlined above does not mean that the ongoing efforts to curb the dust problems will slow down orca placed in abeyance. Indeed 1 I have a clear commitment from the Iron Ore Company of Canada that it will continue its programme of plant modification in an effort to minimize dust problems.

As well I have a firm commitment from the Iron Ore Company of Canada to share substantially with government and hopefully the union in any expenditures related to the 7-Point Programme which involves their mining operation. I will seek a similar commitment from Wabush Mines Limited when I meet with Mr. William Muloin, General Manager,on TUesday of next week. I am in the process of approaching the National Director of the United Steelworkers of America 31.2:1

.:-lay 10, 19 9 Tape ll99 ?K - 2 Mr. Dinn: to determine the extent, if any, of financial supper: which that organization •.o~ill conu-Lbute co t..lus undertaking and i t is ~l~n my l~rention •o approach the Federal Environment au~orities to fund any costs associat:ed with ambient air surveys in t.he corrununicies. The hen. membe:s will see that government i s f lly committed to get to t.he boc.tom of the dust problems ·....nich hilve plag\.'ed •.o~ork:ars and residencs in c.'le Labraeor City - 1-labus h area and to·...ards this end ! have t:he full support of both labour and management . SO."!E HON . HE~!BERS : Hear, hear! 3122

11ay 10,1979 Tape No. 1200 AH-1 MR. SPEAKER:(Mr.Ottenheimer) Before recognizing the hon. member,I would welcome some people to the galleries of the House. We have students from two schools. Twenty-nine Grade V and Vl students from Little Bay Integrated School in Little Bay, Green Bay accompanied by a number of teachers, Mr. Samuel, Mr. Pitts, Mrs. Simms and Mrs.Snow. And we also have in the galleries fourteen Grade V and Vl students from Halls Bay Elementary School of Southbrook accompanied by Mr. James Starkes and Mrs.Trudi Starkes and !1rs. Brenda Fudge.

I know all hon. members join me in welcoming these stucents and their teachers. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear~ MR. SPEAKER: Also present in the galleries from the Town Council of Hare Eay we have two members of the town council,Councillor Fraser House and Councillor Gary Collins. I am sure hon. members join me also in welcoming these gentleman. SOME HON. Mfu~ERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: The hon. member .!:or LaPoile. MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, there is not much else 1 I guess 1can be said to add to what the han. gentleman has already indicated the government is prepared to do in the Ministerial Statement.

I will save my congratulations to see how the project progresses but on . ~~e surface it would seem to me to be a fairly good approach to tackling this problem that has plagued residents of Western Labrador for so long. It is unfortunate that it took twelve Commission of Enquiry of one sort or another and,as the hon. gentleman indicated,only one of these enquiries and studies that have been made in Labrador West to date, only one had to do with the dust problem. It is unfortunate that it took so long to really bring the point home to the people in authority, that chis was indeed a very grave and serious matter.

I am glad ~~at a medical assessment will be made of the whole 31.23

·. May 10,1979 Tape No. 1200 AH-2 lo!R. N£ARY: population of Labrador City and ~;abush , especially Labrador City where the dust problem seems to be far worse tha.'\ it is in Wab\Uh. It was so bad the J.as t tl.me that I went in, I t..'link, on Eastern Provincial Air-..,ays the Captain was giving the passengers onboard the aircraft a sor t of icea about their whereabouts and so forth and when t.'ley woul d be landing and that sort of thing and poin ·ted out the pollution in the ai.r about t: .. en:.y-five or t.hJ.n:y miles from the airport.

I do not know if it is meant to be a tourist attract-ion or not, but t.,is is one of the things that the Captain of the aircraft or the First Office~ whoever was talk ing on t.,e PA system to t.'le passengers, pointed out. But it strikes me, Sir, as being a very good proqramme. The only thing that concerns me about i 1:, if I do have any concern, is the fact 31.24

May 10, 1979 Tape 1201 EC - l MR. NEARY: that it could possibly get bogged down, although I heard the minister outside the House the other night or not the Steelworkers International Union were willing to participate or whether Ottawa was prepared to participate or not . The minister indicated wh~n being interviewed that the government would find the :rooney somehow and would go ahead wi t.'l this programme.

I hope that it will not get bogged down in semantics, that the government will get sulky if the United Steelworkers does not participate in the cost, because the local president of the Steelworkers in Labrador City has already indicated - and I might say just for the minister's benefit that I think it is wrong to threaten to go over the head of the president in Labrador City. !I!R. DINN: NObody threatened him, Sir. MR. NEARY: Okay, well that is fine 7but that is not t.~e way it came out. But it would be wrong because it would create very poor relations between the government and the company.

Well, I am glad to hear that, because that is a good point, that maybe the president of the Steelworkers in Labrador City did not think that he had the authority and not wanting to accept the full responsibility may have said, 'Well, go ahead, consult our head office,' and they will probably ask Mr. Laite his opinion anyway and then they will decide whether they should go ahead or not. But I certainly agree with his point of view t.'lat if they are to participate then they should share in the profits of the company. If the problem is there it is not of their own volition.

The workers should not have to put up the sroney to correct an occupational health hazard created by a company and not share in the profits of that company. So t.'lat concerned me a little bit, but I am glad to hear that that is straightened out. The other thing that I might suggest to the minister in naming t.'lese committees - that is the company, Mulroney, Mr. Lai te and the minister - I think the minister called them senior management committees. Well, that would automatically turn off 31.25

May 10 , 1979 Tape 1201 EC - 2 MR. NEARY: a lot of labour people , ~oo. I ):)elieve the minister could find a Petter name for that: committee is a combination of boch, it is not: a manage .ment: corruni :;:;ee, and I think ::.'l.at leaves the wrong impression. So I hope, Sir, ~'l.at the various oomrnittees will proceed ;>osthaste to do something about this dust hazard in Labrador West . I-t. has. been neglected long enough.

I certainly am impressed with the seven point prograJMte that has been .i.nd.icat:ed in this ministerial statement and, as I say, I will save my congratulations for rna.ybe a little later on to see how the t.iling progresses. I hope t.'l.ey will not get oogged down in r .ed tape or in technicalities . lt sounds to me to be a good programme and I think it could go a long way towards solving ~'le problem. In the meantime, I ::hink the minister is right in 3126

May 10, 1979 Tape 1202 PK - 1 Mr. Neary: saying that the people in authority are not going to sit back and wait until this Committee reports 1 that any engineering studies that show that improvements should be made immediately that the company will be asked to make these improvements. And I am glad to see that officials of the Department of Mines will become permanent residents of Labrador West. I think it is a good move, Sir, and I wish the minister the best of luck in his endeavour. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! PRESENTING PETITIONS MR. SPBAKER (MR. OTTENHEIMER) : The hon. Leader of the Opposition . MR. W. N.

ROWE: Mr. Speaker, I beg leave to present a petition which I received just yesterday afternoon from most of the residents of an area which can be referred to, is referred to in the petition as New World Island West in my district of Twillingate. The petition, Sir, reads basically as follows: "We 1 the people of New World Island West" - which includes, Mr. Speaker, the communities of Virgin Arm, Carter's Cove, Chanceport, Bridgeport, Moreton's Harbour, w~.ale' s Gulch and Tizzard' s Harbour- 'we 1 the people of New World Island West have been neglected on our roads.

We have not had a bit of road construction since 1956, only what the Deoartment of Highways have patched up. There are places where the corduroy is coming through.'' Hr. Speaker, they say,"not only that 1 but there are curves on this road that you almost meet your tail lights, and in Wintertime it is only a one-way road for twenty-five miles. We have a population of 1,764 people, so,as you know 1 we must have a road; about half the people have cars and pick-ups." We have these communities •t~hich I mentioned shipping fish so that big transport trucks have to go over our roads to collect the fish.

Last year 1 according to the petition 1 there were five trucks, fourteen-wheeler trucks, Mr. Speaker, which travelled over those roads. "We have eight grocery stores with vlholesale trucks as well, which supply those grocery stores.'' So you can imagine what the road would be like which has not been upgraded since 1956. 11 We canl".ot 3127

May 10. 1979 Tape 1202 P!< - 2 !1r. W. N • Rowe : keep our vehicles up to standard in ::his •.:ay ~· They mention, Sir, when you go to the garage to get your muffler out back on and co~£ bac~ a~ain it is beaten off again on the way back ~croe . so~we ,t.'te people of New Wodd :sland :.;est , ask the ~inister of Transpor-~tion ~~d Co~nunications (Mr . 3rett l to loo~ lnto this immediately, and as well our M.H .A.;' myself,uand our M.P., Mr. Baker ." · Mr. Speaker, that petition is signed by some 600 of the adult resid~~ts of that area of New World Island, wh1ch I would estimate is about three - quarters of the ?eogle on ~e voters list people e~titled ~o 3128

May 10, 1979 Tape No. 1203 DW - 1 MR. W.N. ROWE: cast a vote in that area. The vast majority of the people have signed this petition. And, Mr. Speaker, I have . no hesitation whatsoever in supporting the prayer of this petition wholeheartedly and I hope that other members of the House will do so as well. I know they will because the matter of roads is very important to all members on both·sides. Mr.

Speaker, I have been the member for TWilling ate district- that great historic district, the district represented by a number of Premiers and former Premiers in this Pro•1ince; Sir Robert Bond,for example - I have been the member for that district for eighteen months or so 1 and during that. period of time we have been relatively successful in pressuring the government, I suppose, is the right word, to keep some of the committmenus that they made during the.by-election in which I was elected.

As Your Honour is quite aware, and as all members are quite aware 1 there were a great number of promises an~ commitments made to the ·people of the district of Twillingate during that by-election. To give the government its due, Mr. Speaker, there have been a number of those commit­ ments which have been kept, not too much in the way of road work. A commitment was made by the former Premier and by members opposite when they campaigned in that district to upgrade and pave these roads, Mr. Speaker, serving nearly 2,000 people in that area of the district.

I would ask, Sir, that the Minister of Transportation and Communications (Mr. Brett) 1 now that he is drawing up his budget for the upcoming construction season 1 that the very least he can do is to include in that budget for spending capital expenditure on highways sufficient funds to upgrade those roads, some twenty, twenty-five or thirty miles of road 1 those roads and make the roads decent not only 31.29

May 10, 1979 Tape No. 1203 ow - 2 MR. WN. ROWE : for the ·people to use in a so~ial way, driving back and forth, Sir, but because of the contribu­ tion it willd make to the economy of the area,particularly in the sphere of transportation Qf fish to the fish plant in Twillingate. Mr. Speaker, I ask that the petition be laid on the Table of this hon.

House and referred to the department tc which it relat-es, the Department of Transportation and communications 1 with the earnest prayer, on my own part, sir, that the gove:mment earnestly do. something about this and try tc a=omodate these people in a reasonable way in the upcomir.:; con·strtic::ti.on season. Thank you, Sir. MR. SPEAKER (MR. O'l'TENHEIMER): The hon. member for Trinity- Bay de Verde. MR. F. ROWE: Mr.

Speaker, I would like to give my support to the petition presented by the Leader of the Opposition on behalf of 600 people who signed the petition from New world Island West 1 where there is an apProximate population in ac;:c;ess of 1, 700 people. Sir, the reason I would like to support this particular petition 31~0

May 10, 1979 Tape No. 1204 NM - 1 MR. F. ROWE: is this, one is that I spent some time on New world Island and World Island, Sir, is that it has to be one of the most beautiful spots on the Island part of this Province - although it is an island off the Island. It has to be one of the most beautiful spots and therefore it can be a real tourist attraction. I dnubt very much, Sir, whether there are any other islands in· our Province that have such scenic beauty and so many little coves and inlets and beaches and what have you as New World Island.

And many people, Sir, I know for a fact wish to travel to that part of the Province, particularly during the Summer for purposes of holidaying. And, Sir, they will never be attracted there to any great extent as long as they have to beat over the kinds of roads that exist there at the present time. I am utterly astounded, Sir, that there has not been any real work done in this particular area since 1956. I know when I was down there during the by-election that the road conditions were absolutely deplorable but I thought it was the time in the year. But 1956, Sir, no substantial road work done in that time.

It is an astounding fact, Sir. 1956, is that right? AN HON. MEMBER: That is right. MR. F. ROWE: 1956 . AN HON. MEMBER: Both governments. MR. F. ROWE: Yes, both governments. Mr. Speaker, that is completely irrelevant whether it was a Liberal government, a PC gover~ent. The fact is still astounding that there has not been any substantial road work done in that area since 1956 1 and I think that it is time that this government take the bull by the horns and get some road work done in that particular are~ for a second reason, Sir, and I hope we hear from the Minister of Fisheries on this one; the 31.3:1 ·~

May 10, 197'? Tape No. 1204 MR. ?. ROWE: Minisc~r of Fisheries kno~s that one of the ?roblems that we have in this Province is quality cont:::ol •<~ith respecc ~o our fish . ~IR . SI:~!CNS: He is a qood man. !:ie should have been ?::ernier . AN HON. MEMBER: f!ea.r, hear! ~ . F.

ROt·lE: Sir, there is a substantial fishing industry in that: part of the dist:rict, To.·illingace district on New Norld Island , and I ~~uld hope that i= for no other reason that ~e qovernment would see fir:. to do substantial upqra<iing an:d paving of the roads in the New World Island West area as quickly as possible so chat the fish produces being transported out of thac particular area can oe done in such a way that the quality of t!le fish will :1ot be depreciated . :1y colleague 31.32

May 10, 1979 Tape No. 1205 so - 1 MR. F. ROWE: mentioned there were five fourteen-wheelers transporting fish last year in that particular vicinity. And, Sir, one realizes that beating a truck over rough road under hot conditions, particularly in the Summer, and with the dust situation that ~,at certainly has to depreciate the quality of the fish going to the final market whether for processing or for sale. Sir, I would hope for these two reasons - the tourist attraction reason, that beautiful

section of our Province; and for the sake of the fishing industry in that part of the Province - the Government will see fit to improve the road conditions in the New World Island area, 3ir, and I give the petition my wholehearted support. MR. SPEAKER: (Ottenheimer) MR. S. NEARY: Hon. member for LaPoile. So the petition, Sir, will not lock like brotherly love, I thought that I wouid give the petition my support, my wholehearted support, Sir, because I had occasion during the by-election down there to do a little work for my han. colleague and I spent some time in the Tizzard's Harbour area. AN HON. :-!EMBER: MR.

S. NEARY: They were glad to shift you out. Oh, no: Oh, VP~y definitely not: AS a matter of fact, Sir, I could not spend all the time there that they wanted me to spend. AN HON. ME~!BER: (Inaudible) MR. S. NEARY: No, that is right, that is right. My hon. friend has got the message on the other side about the licences or permits to pick blueberries and all that sort of thing. MR. F. ROWE: MR. S. NEARY -: AN HON. MEMBER: MR. S • NEARY : Salmon licences. Salmon licences and all - The Premier's moose licence. Moose licences. But anyway, be that as it may, Sir. I support the prayer of the petition.

And these people down there, Sir, are hard working Newfoundlanders Who are 31.33

•~ay 10, 1979 Tape No. 1205 5:::> - 2 :.IR. S • N::ARY : em:ir.!C<! to the sa~r.e privilec;e as the people over, Eor l.r.st.a.nce, in Upper Island Cove . ..,here my hon . friend announced a water projecr. ~oday , water and seweraqe for Upper Islar.d Cove - AN HON • ~IE.'!B~R : ~IR. S • NEArel : AN HON. NEMBER: MR. S . NEARY : ~l million . Some good. I beq your pardon? Some qood. Some good, that is riqhr. . Well, t hope we are not jusr. qoing to concentrate on Tory districts .

And .I am sure the people down in Tiznrd ' s Harbour and that area are entitled to having a <;ood road as ..,ell as t.'le people in Little Bay Islands are enntleci r.o a good ferry service, Mr . Speaker. OnE: of the first decisions of the new Premier and his Cabinet was r.o approve $460 , 000 for a f ive year period to proV1de a ferry for the people in Lir.tle Bay 1s lands 1 who did nor. want a new ferry, by the way, who wanted a c~useway.

And the hon. gentleman, I believe , had presented a petition in t.'lis House for a cause•~y. aut any~~y , the Government decided to qive the Green Bay ':'ransport $460, 0 00 for five years . How much is thar.? period .2,300,000 over a five year 3134

May 10,1979 Tape No. 1206 AH-1 MR. NEARY: to provide a ferry service that ~hey did not want, they wanted a causeway. So, Mr. Speaker, I would think that the people in Tizzard's Harbour are entitled to the same rights and the same privileges 1 we are all Newfoundlanders,and not just make decisions for Tory districts, that decisions will be made in the best interests of the Province, in the best interests of developing the Province, developing our natural resources and building up the economy of the Province and not just for pork-barreling reasons or political reasons. So for no other reason, Mr.

Speaker, I support the prayer of this petition and I would hope that the people in that area are as good Newfoundlaners as you will find in Little Bay Islands or over in Upper Island Cove or all my friends, former employees of Dosco who used to work on Bell Island, who were entitled to their water and sewer system the same as the people in Little Bay Islands are entitled to any benefits they can get. Unfortunately they wanted a causeway but the Premier decided that he would help out Mr. Weir to get a new ferry. PREMIER. PECKFORD: MR. NEARY: AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) Nobody wanted a causeway.

Then the han. gentleman - Long Island. MR. NEARY: Long Island. That is right, they wanted a causeway. I believe the han. gentleman presented a petition in the House, two petitions 1 on behalf of these people,and wanted the han. gentleman to make representation to Ottawa to try and get a causeway built to Long Island. Yet despite that 1 almost $2.5 million taken out off the public treasury to give the Green Bay Transpcrt sufficient funds to buy themselves a new ferry. So the people down there now are discouraged and will probably never, ever get their causeway.

So I believe the people in Tizzard's Harbour are just as good. MR. SIMMONS: You know the reasen on Long Island, do you not? 31.35

May 10,1979 Tape No. 1206 AH-2 MR. NEARY: No. MR.SIMMONS: He told them in writing he did not like the way they voted the last time. MR. ~'EARY: Oh, he did not like the way they voted the last time. "So you are going to have a ferry 1 we are not going to give you a causeway." It had nothing to do with the support. MR. SFEAKER:(Mr.Ottenheirner) Order, please! The hon. gentleman has strayed from supporting the petition to getting into extraneous matters. MR.R.SIMMONS: I:'lteresting but extraneous. MR. NEARY: Well, Mr.

Speaker, I have wound up my few remarks, Sir, and I again want to congratulate my hon. colleague, the Leader of the Opposition, for making such a wonderful presentation, making such a pitch on behalf of his constituents and I do hope, Sir, that the Minister of Transportation and Communications (Mr.Brett) and the Minister of Finance (Dr.Collins) and the Premier when they are drawing up their list of projects for this year will include Tizzard's Harbour - I wish the hon. the Premier would keep this in mind- as well as the three mile stretch of road from the Trans-Canada Highway to Grand Bay West in the district of LaPoile where a pro~ise was made.· Although my hon. friend said no promise was made, a promise was made to the people there that that road would be paved.

MR. C. BRETT: Who made it? MR. NEARY: Well I can tell the hon. gentleman who did it·. But anyway, Sir, I support the prayer of the petition. MR. SPEAKER: for Bellevue. MR. Cl'LLAN: The hon. member Mr. Speaker, I want to stand for a minute cr two and speak in support of the 31.36

~ ay 10 , 1979 Tape No. 1206 A!:i- 3 MR. CALL AN : petition presented by the Leader of the Opposition on behalf of his constituents down on New World Island. Mr. Speaker, a dozen. years o:i:' more, about twelve, thirteen or fourteen years ago,I was down on New World Island as a school teaeher, a school ll!aster, and I remember the names of the communities quite well, Morton's ~aEbour, Tizzard's !larbour, Chance Port and Bridgeport and so on. I have many friends down there. I made them while I was down there that year. I saw s0111e o.f them less than two years ago on another occasion when I was down there. Mr.

Spe ,aker, when I was down there thirteen or fourteen years ago it was at the time when the new high school was opened in Virgin Arm .and two ye~ ago when I was down there I not;iced that a big new gymnatorium had been build onto that school which of course it did not have when it was built initially fourteen years ago. But I was suxprised to hear in spite of some advancements in education and so on that no substantial work had been done on these roads since 1956 1 especially when you 00nsider, Mr.

Speaker, that the gentleman who was Deputy Minist'er of highways for a long and extended period of t .i.llle was a gentleman who was formerly from Morton's !larhour 1 .1 Mr. Knight, wb:Jse brother 31.37

May 10, 1979 Tape 1207 EC- 1 MR. CALLAN: I knew quite well down in Moreton's Harbour when I was there as a school­ teacher. But Mr. Kniqht. I understand. retired prob~bl~ in ~975 or 197~. But it is surprising to hear that nothing substantial has been done with that road for - How long? - AN HON. MEMBER: Twenty-three years. MR. CALLAN: - an awfully long time. Less than two years ago, Mr.

Speaker, when I was there, I travelled over most all the sections of that road which was described in the petition, and, as one of the former supporters of the petition said, the road, of course, is in a deplorable condition, there is no question about it. Even if some capital li!Oney was laid out for reconstruction this year and perhaps some pavement next year, it would iD1prove the standard of the road considerably. The people down there, Mr.

Speaker, as they said in t.l1e petition, are primary producers; millions of pounds of fish are trucked over these highways every year, so it makes every bit of common sense in the world that these 1,700 people living in these half a dozen communi ties should expect and deserve to get an i111proved road system. Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Transportation and Communications (Mr. Brett) seems to be very engrossed in conversation with the Minister of Mines and Energy (Mr. Doody). I guess they are contemplat.ing what they can do together to lay out some funds for the improvement of these roads.

In supporting the petition, Mr. Speaker, one of the earlier speakers also mentioned about how beautiful New World Island is for tourists and so on, and I heard the Minister of Transportation and Communications referring to the fact that Random Island, which happens to be in his district, is also a beautiful island, and I dare say it is. Last Fall, Mr. Speaker, a big new bridge was officially opened. I think that bridge led to Random Island. Is that correct? - that R. c. Brett Bridge, as it was named. No? It is down in that district but it is not to Random Island. 31.38

May 10, 1979 Tape 1207 EC - 2 AN HON. MEMBER: No. MR. CALLAN: The point I am trying to make, is only several hundred feet long. But New World Island is very fortunate in that respect, that there is no difficulty at all in getting to New World ~sland - the bridges have been there. The bridges are there, they were built many, many years ago. The y were built thirteen or fourteen years ago. As a matter of fact, when I went to New World Island in the Fall of the year, I went on a ferry - or my car did - but when I left in the Spring, the road was under construction and the bridges were being put in then.

I brought my car across on the harbour ice before it broke up in the Spring so I did not get a chance to drive back on the new bridges that link the is land to the mainland at Boyd' s Cove • But as I was saying, a tremendous amount of money can be expended in building bridges which only cover short gaps of highways. This happened down in the district of Trinity North as it happens elsewhere in the Province. But these people here, Mr. Speaker, are asking that probably several hundred thousand dollars be spent to do miles and miles of road rather than just several hundred feet of bridges such as the R.C.

Brett Bridge down in Trinity North. Mr. Speaker, I support the petition. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear~ ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS FOR WHIC!l NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN MR. SPEAKER: (Mr. Ottenheimer) PREMIER PECKFORD: The hon. the Premier. Mr. Speaker, I wish to table today the numbers of people that I have on my staff, that are on the staff around the Province, which are now under review - to table the names and the sal.aries and to table also a copy of the contract of the Press Secretary.

The copy of the contract for the senior policy advisor is not being tabled at this point in time because it has not been finalized. 31.39

May 10, 1979 Tape 1207 EC - 3 ?RE.'IIER ?EC:<l:'ORD: As soon as it is, I shall table it :in response ·to questions from the Oppos ·ition concerning it a wee.'c or so ago . ( ~!r. Otte:1heimer ) Oral Que·stior:s. The hon . ~~e Le~der of the Opposition. rm. w. N. RO\VE: ~~ - Speaker, l wou~d like to address a gue.stion to the hon. ·the Premier . MR. DOODY: Excuse me, may we revert to "Answers to Questions for which Notice h-as been Given"? MR. SPEAKER: SOME HON . 11E:l1BE:RS : MR. DOODY: Is H. agreo;<d? Agreed , ~!r . Speaker. Yesterday, che hon ~ the member fo r aur:;eo - Bay d'Espoi,r ( ~!r.

Simmons) asked about the Lobstick reserve r in Churchil~ and it sounded very om:i.nous and serious and I checked it out immediately, and subsequently, che media asked some questions a.bout it. I answered them, and 31.40

May 10, 1979 Tape No. 1208 NM - 1 .)(& . DOODY: I thl.nk that I sr.ould respond here in the House as well. The question I think really centered on the control water into che main r esevoir. I had been thinking when I answered the question in te!:lDS of the whole dyke operation up there, · ~hicb are a bunch of e~h filled dykes on which an ongoing programme of maintenance and repair cakes place. They have helicopters up there which patrol the dykes and the crews who regularly repair erosion.

I do believe that my friend wa$ referring to the control structure itself and I have been L'"lformed that some symptoms of erosion had occurred, some heavy rocks had been thrown up on the structure itself some time ago and CLFCo immediately engaged an engineering firm who did an indepth survey of the situation. They have informed aydro who have advised me that there is no immediate problems.

They foresee no :aj or repair programme necessary for at least seven years, maybe as long as fifteen years. so they are satisfied ,and the ~ouse and the public should be satisfied,that there is no immediate problem at Lobstick. There is a small erosion ongoing. It is not a major engineering concern. It is being monitored constantly so the questions that followed up beyond that as to penalties and loss o= po,.,er to Hydro Quebec and so on are in terms of this particular question i-¥Yelevant. Fortunately the situation is well under control, there is no immediate problem. 31.41 ...

May 10, 1979 Tape No. 1208 NM - 2 ORAL QUESTIONS: MR. SPEAKER (Ottenheimer) : The han. Leader of the Opposition. MR. W. ROWE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to add~ess a question to the han. the Premier.concerning some statements made yesterday,which I would assume he found as alarming as everyone else did, by Mr.

Harold Snyder of C-Core in which he mentioned that ------~ although the economic risk was worth taking that there was no doubt that a disaster larger than the ones, I think was the way he referred to it, which ruined the fishing industry in Brittany on the Coast or France following an oil spill there which rendered the fishery inoperable for about ten years, a disaster larger than that could occur off the Coast of Labrador in connection with drilling for oil 1 and the subsequent transportation thereof particularly. Mr.

Speaker, I would like to ask the Premier what measures are presently in effect as far as the government is concerned to first of all protect the Coast of Labrador against an oil spill occurring, and,secondly 1 if one should inadvertently occur what measures are presently in effect as far as this government is concerned 1 in co-operation with Ottawa or otherwise 1 in order to salvage the situation and make sure that the damage is minimal? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD : Mr.

Speaker, I do not know if the Leader of the Opposition remembers about a year and a half or two years ago it was indicated at that time through the Department of Mines and Energy and the local Department of the Environment that we as a provincial government undertook a study on our own through various agencies of the government and the university to try to identify levels of risk as it related to environmental damage done by any possible oil spill if and when we discover oil off our Coast. I think that was tabled here in this hon. House at the time.

Subsequent to that, or simultaneously with that initiative,the provincial government encouraged the federal environmental people to get on with the job of doing additional environmental studies off Labrador and in Northern 3142

May 10, 1979 Tape No. 1208 NM - 3 PREMIER PECY.FORD : waters. I think at that particular time the federal government were relying heavily upon experimental environmental problems and experiments they were doing in the Beaufort Sea and in the Artie Islands area that were ongoing with industry and by themselves. Last Summer, if I remember correctly, the Federal Environmental Department then 31.43

May 10, 1979 Tape 1209 PK - 1 Premier Peckford: decided to enlarge the geographical area of their environmental experiments that particular study, I would rather all of the results are done. But additional work was done in consultation with the Province with the federal government having the lead role in it in experiments environmentally to ensure that the proper precautions would be taken. So the Provincial Government has, I think, demonstrated in the last couple of years its concern for what the Leader of the Opposition points out, as a result of Mr.

Snyder's statements, and have encouraged the federal government to get heavily involved in it. There are a number of areas of the Labrador Coast which are high risk areas as it relates to environmental damage. And as one moves down from the North to a Southerly direction off the Island of Newfoundland,the impact and the risk lessens and diminishes somewhat. So initiatives are underway and we will continue to take into account comments like Mr. Snyder's because it is extremely important that we fully appreciate all the environmental risks involved before any development occurs after there is some commerical find.

MR. W. N. ROWE: Mr. Speaker, a supplementary. MR. SPEAKER {MR. OTTENHEIMER): A supplementary. MR. W. N. ROWE: Mr. Speaker, then from what the Premier is saying, it is rather a long statement with very little specifics, talk in terms of initiatives and directions and so on. From the government's standpoint 1 is Mr. Snyder correct when he says that, as reported, I was not at the symposium, reported that neither the government nor industry has the means of getting to a major spill and containing it before a tragedy results?

That is his expert opinion that neither the government nor the industry has the means available at the present time to avert a major tragedy -tragedy may not be the correct wore- a major disaster in terms of damage if a spill or a blow-out were to occur at the present time. Is that a correct statement? 31.44

May 10, 1979 Tape 1209 PK - 2 MR. SPEAKER (MR. OTTENHEIMER): The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, I could not say off the top and then the Leader of the Opposition expects me today to comment in a qualified way on whether this expert's opinion is a valid one. All I can say to the Leader of the Opposition is that we are taking every initiative possible with the industry and with the federal government to ensure that the latest technological advances are applied against any kind of oil spill, if and when we discover oil, and if and when we decide that production of that oil should go ahead. MR.

NEARY: MR. SPEAKER: MR. NEARY: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. A supplementary, the hon. member for LaPoile. Mr. Speaker, do I understand the hon. gentleman, Sir, to state in his answer that he could not say off the top of his head whether or not Mr. Snyder's remarks were correct, and whether or not the latest technology that the oil companies or the Government of Canada Coastguard have, he could not say off the top of his head whether or not they could contain a major blow-out or a major oil spill off our coast?

In view of the fact, Sir, that the Provincial Government are the ones who lay down the rules and regulations for drilling off our coast, have they not taken adequate steps to protect our fishery that we have gone through hell on earth to try to build up? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: If the member for LaPoile (Mr.

Neary) will remember, some time ago, perhaps as far away ago as two years, there was established at the time that we were negotiating with the oil companies a special committee of federal-provincial people dealing with environmental and safety factors as it relates to offshore drilling, not only off the Coast of Labrador and off the Coast of the Island of Newfoundland, but also in all o~~er frontier areas in Canada. So with the federal government moves are being taken to ensure that the latest 31.45

May 10, 1979 Tape 1209 PK - 3 Premier Peckford: technology and the latest expertise is used and applied against any such eventuality as ~he hon. member points out. MR. NEARY: A supplementary question, ~~- Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (MR. OTTENHEIMER) : A supplementary. MR. NEARY: Mr.

Speaker, I think we should pursue this matter a little bit further because I had occasion recently in view of the oil spill in the Gulf which threatened the fishery in my own district, and it still does threaten the fishery because a pilot of EPA spotted an oil slick recently off the Cape Breton Coast that could very easily drift down in Bay St. George area or down on the Southwest Coast, down in the Burgee Banks and in the Gulf and ruin the fishery down there, that could still happen.

But, Sir, after that I had occasion to call up I the officials in Ottawa and do some research myself, that the government should be doing,by the way, and discovered that even though the latest technology is available, that even though we saw these two little tugs out here in Freshwater Bay towing a boom around, even though the Coastguard is responsible, has taken the responsibility of looking after the equipment for the oil companies, the latest techonology available in the world 1 I am told by the officials, and perhaps the Premeir can confirm this 1 that there is no technology available on the face of the earth today to contain or to cope with a major oil spill or a major blow-out off the Coast of Newfoundland or Labrador.

There is no such technology available. And that is something that we should keep in the back of our mind when we are allowing these companies to go off there and drill for oil and gas, that our fishery 31.46

May 10, 1979 Tape No. 1210 OW - l MR. S. NEARY: is threatened if there is a major oil spill or a major blowout MR. SPEAKER (MR. OTTENHEIMER) : Hon. Premier. P REI'IIEi<. Pr:Cl<~'Ol<D: I appreciate the cumrnents tnat tne non . member has made and I assure him that every action is being taken that can be taken in line with everything that the federal environ­ mental people do. I would also like to add, Mr. Speaker, in response to the hon. member that I sort of remember a number of years ago the hen. member was taking the approach that we were driving the oil companies away. MR. S. NEARY: MR.

SPEAKER: A supplementary question, Sir. Order, please! Final supplementary and then I will recognize another hon. member. MR.S. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, I subscribed to Mr. Snyder's remark here that we need the industry, we need the oil companies 1 but we are doing it at the peril of our fishing industry which is in my opinion as equally as great. I welcome the oil companies but, Mr.

Speaker, what I want to know from the Premier and the government have they convinced themselves, are they persuaded themselves that if there is a major hlowout or if there is a major oil spill off our coast that they can convince themsel\•es that it will not ruin the fishery and, if so, would the government not be well advised to set up a trust fund to compensate the.fishermen because that threat is there? The hon. gentleman knows it is there.

The officials tell me, of the coast Guard and so forth, there is no . way1 and the hon. gentleman knows this 1 that a major blowout or an oil spill can be contained or they can cope with it even with the latest technology they have now over on the south- side; the technology is not available. I am asking the minister can he assure the fishing industry, the plant workers and the fishermen. of this Province that if there is a major blowout or a major oil spill that it will not threaten their livlihood, that 31.4'7

May 10, 1979 Tape No. 1210 DW - 2 MR. S. NEARY: if in the event of that happening that they will be compensated from a special fund set up by these multi-national, huge oil companies that are in here drilling for gas and oil off our coast? MR. SPEAKER (MR. O'!'TENHEIMER) : Hen. Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Several points on that question, Mr. Speaker, need to be addressed. I do not know if the hen. member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) has read the oil and gas regula­ tions.

If the hon. member for LaPoile has read the oil and gas regulations he will see that there has to be a major envir.onmental inquiry performed in all the communities along the area that are affected by production, before production· starts, if there is a commercial find. There has to be that kind of process done before - MR. S. NEARY: Before,but what about during the exploration? PREMIER PECKFORD: Number two, hopefully the hon. member recognizes,as we all do,I am sure that there are risks,not only in offshore oil and gas drilling but in many things along that nature onshore or offshore.

I accept and acknowledge,obviously, that there are risks involved in not only drilling 1 but if there is a commercial find in production 1 more so in production than there is in drilling. We have to take every precautionary measure to ensure that that risk is as minimal as possible and that the fishery is protected. I think also, in light of the oil and gas regulations,if t~e hon. gentleman would read them, is that there are funds established to provide dollars in case of any · kind of damage - MR. S. NEARY: But that is only after they go in pro- duction. 31.48

May 10, 1979 Tape No. 1210 DW - 3 PREMIER PECKFORD: - and that is an important component of a regulatory regime for offshore oil and gas exploration and drilling. It is extremely important. I just once again, number four, reinterate to the hon. gentleman that we are with the Federal Department of Environment,and our own departments concerned doing all we can to ensure that any risk environmentally to our fishery is at a minimum1 so that we can still see the exploration go ahead. But that there is a risk, I think the hon. gentleman acknowledges as do we all. There is a risk!

There is a risk in almost anything man does today 1 whether it is offshore oil and gas or whether it is walking across the street. The question then is not one of risk, Mr. Speaker, I do not think, - we have all accepted that. The question is, is it an acceptable risk? Can we each day do more to reduce the risk to ensure that de,•elopment goes ahead and at the same time the environment is protected and traditional, indigenous resource activities are still protected on their progress towards other resource develop­ ments like oil and gas? MR. S. NEARY: She is wide open. MR. SPEAKER (MR.

OTTENHEIMER) : The hon. member for Terra Nova1 followed by the hon. gentleman for Port au Port. MR. T. LUSH: Mr. Speaker, I want to direct a couple of questions to the Minister of Labour and Manpower (Mr. Dinn) and I want to say how sorry I am that I was not.in my place when he gave the statement but the hon. the Opposition House Leader did a commendable job and said almost precisely the same thing I would have said myself.

But a couple of questions and one is related to the inquiries that the minister mentions and I just want to ask a question about, I think it is the last inquiry that he alludes to, the McCarthy Royal commission that was set up in 1977. 31.49

May 10, 1979 Tape No. 1211 so - l !1R. T. LUSH: I wonder if the Minister can indicate to the House just what is the status of tlus inquiry because still was not completed? MR. SPEAKER: (Ottenheimer) Han. Minister of Labour and Manpower. :-:R~ J, DINN : Mr. Speaker, the McCarthy Inquiry is not complete. We have had - I do not know if it is phase one or Book l presented to Government. I have not had a chance to have a look at it yet but in my brief look at it there are no recommendations in there.

And I have to get in touch with or have Government get in touch with the Commissioner and ask him when the final report will be in because there are no recommendations in the report and all we have is a condensation of - in my opinion, I have not read all of the report ~et - but a condensation of the evidence and so on. So when the commission will be completed and presented to Government I can not say to the hon. member right now1 but I will endevour to get the answer for him and relay it to him . MR. T. LUSH: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Supplementary, han. member for Terra Nova. MR. T.

LUSH: Again, the only reservation really about this report that I express is the same one expressed by the apposition House Leader and that was having to do with asking the union or the workers to contribute towards the cost of this study. And the question I would like to direct to the Minister is what rationale is he using or is the Government using in asking the I union, in other words,in asking the workers to contribute towards the cost of this study? It is asking the workers to contribute towards a study to make the work place safe. This seems to be rather unusual, ~~.

Speaker, and could even be a precedent whereby we are asking workers to contribute to pay towards making their work place safe. So, just what is the rationale far ~~is? 31~0

Hay 10, 1979 MFr. SPEAKER: (Ottenheimer) MR. J. D!NN: Tape No. 1211 so - 2 Han. Minister for Labour and Manpower. Mr. Speaker, in an effort to have a management sit down as a committee and make decisions as to what route the seven proposals that we have put forward, who should do the various studies and so on,so that nobody feels that one has a right over the other, I felt that we should participate, Mr.

Speaker, all the way through and that I did not want the union,as an example 1 coming out at the end of the study to say, "Well, Government paid the piper so they call the tune." I wanted to make sure everyone was in there on an equal footing. I wanted the decision made almost unanimously between labour and management and Government as to who should do the various aspects of the studies and d1at we have agreement all the way through the piece so that when we get something at the end we will get a resolution of the dust problems and possibily the health problems in the Labrador City~Nabush area.

That is the basic idea. AN HON. MEMBER: Supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: I have indicated I recognize the han. member for Port au Port next. MR. J. HODDER: Mr. Speaker, a question for the Minister of Transportation and Communications. Has the minister received a final report on the conditions which caused the landslide on the Trans-Canada Highway on the West Coast? MR. SPEAKER: Han. Minister of Transportation and Communications. MR. C. BRETT : Mr. Speaker, I was advised five minutes before the House opened that the report has been given to the engineers• in. MR. J.

HODDER: It has not come up to my desk but the report is Supplementary, ~tr. Speaker. 3151

May 10, 1979 MR. SPEAKER: (Ottenheimer) Port au Port. MR. J. i:1UIJDE1<: Tape No. 1211 sn·- 3 Supplementary, hon. member for said that there is a small chance that a similar occurrence would occur. Does the minister have a report of another condition, a similar situation occurring on the trunk road rur.ning through the communities of Felix Cove,Campbells Creek? MR. SPEAKER: and Co~unications. MR. C. BRETT: any such report. MR. J. HODDER: MR. SPEAKER: Port au Port.· MR. J. HODDER: Hon. Minister of Transportation No, Mr. Speaker, I do not have Supplementary, ~lr. Speaker.

S11pplementary, hon. member for · Is the minister aware that a petition was presented here in this House last year from those people, that surveys have been done by his department and ~~at a report is in his department that the road is being eroded underneath by sea action; that some 6,000 people travel across that particular road and that a letter has gone to him or one of his officials have told him that there is a possible loss of life in that particular area if that road is to slide? MR. SPEAKER: Hon. Minister of Transportation and Communications. io!R. C. BRETT: No, Mr.

Speaker, I am not aware of the condition of that road but certainly if it is as serious as the hon. member says then I will certainly look into it immediately. MR. I. STRACHJI.N: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Hon. member for Eagle River, Burgee- Bay dpEspoir, St. John's North and stephenville. MR. I STRACHAN: Mr. Speaker, the provincial oil and gas regulations protect, I think adequately, the economic situation as far as the companies are concerned in Newfoundland, 3152

May 10, 1979, Tape 1212, Page 1 -- apb MR. STRACHAN: although not totally, but an environmental aspect - we can get back to that - could the Premier indicate to- us whether,nurnber one, there is any possibility of including in the oil and gas regulations a monitoring system of the oil companies during their drilling programmes since they directly regulate themselves, or monitor themselves? Is there any possibility that the Province can obtain funds from them or from various sources to monitor their drilling programmes in a far more visual and physical way?

And secondly, is there any possibility of including what they call the weather window, a set time in which the oil companies must get out of certain areas, especially Northern Labrador areas before the weather and the ice damage and ice problems could create a very serious situation in which the oil, if there was a blow­ out or spill late in the Fal~would not be contained until at least the following year because of the ice conditions? MR. SPEAKER(Ottenheimer) : PREMIER PECKFORD: The han. the Premier.

The whole question of monitoring the drilling programme,! think the hon. member is aware that we do have controlling geologists on staff who go out on the drill rigs. Now there is a question here on the weather window thing. I think that is an important consideration. I do not know if it is covered under the federal government or under us. We have a problem here that I would have to check out for the han. member to be totally accurate in my statement and that is where federal jurisuiction stops and provincial jurisdiction 31.53

May 10, 1979, Tape 1212, Page 2 -- apb PREMIER PECKFORD: begins as it relates to environmental and safety procedures for offshore oil and gas drilling off Labrador and the Island of Newfoundland. Right now, as the hon. member knows, as all Newfoundland knows, we are into a dispute as it relates to the ownership of the resource underneath the Continental Shelf. That is one thing and that is a jurisdictional, constitutional problem. The other one is resolving and working out with the federal authorities as it relates to environmental and safety precautionary measures which must be taken.

I know to date, and up to this present moment, we do have petroleum geologists and the like go out on the drill rigs and spend quite a bit of time monitoring the actual drilling programme, that is number one. Number two, on the whole question of a weather window, I think it is extremely important and I will have to refer to the Minister of Mines and Energy (Mr. Doody) and others for additional information as it relates to our responsibilities on tat subject. MR. STRACHAN: MR. SPEAKER(Ottenheimer): MR. STRACHAN: A supplementary. A supplementary.

Agreeing with the fact that the Province obviously has a jurisdictional dispute concerning the seabed ownership, obviously then there also could be a dispute concerning environment, as to who handles it. But the Province had the forthrightness to bring in oil and gas regulations over the top of th~ federal government as far as the economics 31.54

May 10, 1979, Tape 1212, Page 3 -- apb MR. STRACHAN: side was concerned so surely the Province could do exactly the same thing because it is our fisheries which are involved, it is a livel~hooa nere, surely che Province can do exactly the same thing environmentally? MR. SPEAKER(Ottenheimer) . : The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: A very interesting concept, Mr. Speaker. The reason why we brought in our own regulations as it relates to ownership of the resources under the seabed is because we believe we have a legal case, a sound,strong legal case.

The same does not exist as it relates to environmental concerns. It is pretty clear under the constitution which of the two jurisdictions has primacy in that field constitutionally and therefore we do not have near the case. And any good lawyer worth his salt in the business of constitutionality as it relates to the Provinces and the federal government would advise their companies easily that on the environmental question the federal government has primacy. MR. STRACHAN: A supplementary. MR. SPEAKER: A supplementary. MR.

STRACHAN: On that point there, the Premier surely should feel that if we have no strong legal case as far as environment is concerned, surely we have a strong legal case if a spill in the environment will affect the livelihood of the people in this Province. So surely we have a case in which, if the fishery is wiped out, although we cannot control the environment, we have a very strong argument and a very strong case because the livelihood of the people of this Province would be wiped out. Surely it can be argued that we have 3155

May 10, 1979, Tape 1212, Page 4 - - apb ~ffi. STRACHAN: juri&aiction over the environment if the environment will affect the livelihood of the people. MR . SPE~~ER(Ottenheimer): The hon. the Premier. PREMIER PECKFORO: Mr. Speaker, it is a moral argument not a legal one as I understand what the hon. gentleman just said. It has no weight at all legally. I am sure his leader would acknowledge that right from the start .

Does the hon. member recognize that before we even began any drilling under our regulations that tve established the Federal/Provincial Environmental Committee to oversee and to meet from time to time as it relates to the ongoing safety and environmental concerns on drilling? And if he does, that therefore 315B

May 10,1979 Tape No. 1213 AH-1 PREMIER MOORES: this is one way in which we have tried to adjust that problem knowing full well that the oil spills and so on will be disasterous to our own tishery and things to do with Newfoundland as opposed to Canada. But on the whole question of constitutionality, I am sure his leader could give him some advice on that. MR, SPEAKER: (Mr. Ottenheimer) I will hear one additional supplementary from the han. member for LaPoile and then I will recognize the hon. member for Burgee Bay d'Espoir. MR.

NEARY: Mr.Speaker, as I said earlier I think we should pursue this matter because the officials tell me again that there is no technology available today to cope with a major oil spill or a blowout off our coast. So what I am going to ask the Premier is this - a simple yes or no answer-would the han. gentleman indicate to the House if the Province in drafting these regulations have left them wide open and have issued permits to oil companies to drill off our coast for oil and gas knowing full well that there is a danger, that there is a threat to our fish?

The hon. gentleman who is minister of that department 1 the hon. gentleman should be able to give me that answer simply yes or no. Have the permits been issued by this government to these oil companies knowing that if there is a major blowout or an oil spill that our fishing industry could be wiped out overnight? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Premier. PREMIER PECKFORD: Mr. Speaker, we have acknowledged that there is a risk involved in drilling offshore.

The nature of the risk, the degree of the risk is very difficult to put into words to satisfy the member for LaPoile (Mr.Neary). at the present moment ~ we are doing all we can on it and we acknowledge that there is a risk. MR. SPEAKER: Hon. member for Burgee- Bay d'Espoir. Before the hon. gentleman asks his question 1 I would 3~57

May 10,1979 Tape No. 1213 AH-2 MR. SPEAKER:(Mr.Ottenheimer) welcome to the House on behalf of all hon. members twenty-seven high school students from POint Leamington, accompanied by two of their teachers, Mr. Andrews and Mr. Parsons. I know all hdn. members join me in welcoming these students and teachers~to the House. SOME HOliT. MEMBERS : MR. SPEJ>..KER: Bay d 'Espoir. MR. STMMONS: Hear, hear! Hon. member for Burgee- Mr. Speaker, I had a question for the Minister of Health (Mr.House) but I hope in his absenc~ perhaps the Premier would - AN HON .MEMBER: What minister? MR.

SIMMONS: The Minister of Health (Mr.House). Oh, the Minister of Health is now the former - I am sorry about that. I cannot keep track of that fellow. The Minister of Health is the member for Humber Valley (Mr.House). I was thinking of my dear friend from Gander, but he has departed that ministry. He is near the exit doer these d3ys, Mr. Speaker, in Consumer Affairs. Yes, the Minister of Health (Mr House) then.

I understand from a radio report in the last day or so- I think today 1 actually- that in Ontario they have determined that the use of X-rays there, they have found out that in using the X-ray equipment, the users, the technicians have been exposing the persons getting the X-rays to unjustifiably large doses of radiation, sometimes eight to ten times what is required to perform the X-ray technique and that this in turn has been traced to a form of cancer in some persons who have had X-rays there. I view this, Mr.

Speaker,as quite a serious situation and I am wondering if the minister could indicate to the House whether there is any indication that such is the situation here? That persons getting x-rays are being exposed unduly to large doses of radiation in the process. MR. SPEAKER: Hon. Minister of Health. 31.58 ..

May 10 ,1979 Tape No. 1213 AH- 3 ~L~ . EOUSE: ~~. Speaker, on that specific question I cannot answer, but it i s a matter of co.ncern to the department. :..s a matter of fact 1 it is under discussion now and it: will be dis~~ssed at the government level becau~e we believe that excessive x-rays may cause more damage than they .find out about. For instance 1 we have people having ~ have X-rays every two or three years for tuberculosis and we are wondering if that is not too much. That is under study now. And of course this latest finding that the member for Burgeo - Say d 'Espoir (Mr.

Si!J'.mons) just mentioned , I have not heard it, ! did not hear it i n the news today, but certainly I will bri.ng it to the attention of the staff. :I am sure that is one of the t.'lings they have in mind with regard to perhaps trying to think in terms of cutting back on the excessive use of x - rays for the detection of tuberculosis . /'IR. SIMMONS: ~~( MR.Ottenheimer ) ~lR. SIMMONS: 11r. speaker, a supplementary. A supplementary. Mr. Spea..lcer, the minister addressed himself to the matter of the number of X-rays. ~ly question was obviou .sly related to that, but ~ am taL!ting

part i cularly about the actual dosa<Je that a person is exposed to· during an individual X-ray. Obviously the t• ... o are quite related. !1y question then in supplementary to the minister is, Does he know ""nether any mechaniS1l1 is i n position to monitor 3:1.59

May 10, 1979 Tape 1214 EC - 1 MR. SIMMONS: what is, in effect, the case throughout the hospitals and the other places where X-Ray equipment is being used? Is there some monitoring mechanism in place to determine whether these pieces of equipment are being used properly? Are they being used by adequately trained personnel and are they being used in accordance with the procedures for usage of such equipment? MR. SPEAKER: (Mr. Ottenheimer) The bon. the Minister of Health. MR. HOUSE: Mr. Speaker, they are being used, I think, by adequate personnel.

I do not know if it has anything to do, perhaps, with the quality of the X-Ray machines or not - some are, I guess, better than others - but I certainly will endeavour to take this matter up with staff and bring the information back to the House. MR. SIMMONS: MR. SPEAKER: for one supplementary. MR. SIMMONS : Mr. Speaker. I will recognize the hon. gentleman .One further supplementary just to clarify the minister's first answer, to answer my first question.

He indicated there was some study ongoing in terms of persons who are getting a number of X-Rays, who are being frequently X-Rayed for apparently warranted reasons. How formalized is that study? Has some outside person been called in to do it and at what point could we expect a report on his or her findings? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. minister. MR. HOUSE: It is not a study in the strict sense of the word of somebody being brought in to do it. The fact is, I believe everybody who is connected with the health field feel that excessive use of radiology - X-Rays - may not be good, it could damage certain cells and so on.

For instance, in the case of tuberculosis, which is one case I could mention, and in a few other cases the same, perhaps we should not have the large numbers of X-Rays. For instance, in going to University, I believe you have to have an X-Ray two or three times during that process. The same applies to waitresses, of course, in restaurants and so on. They have to have these examinations every 31.;;o

May 10, 1979 Tape 1214 EC - 2 MR. HOUSE: year, and X-Rays. So what I am saying is it is not a study, it is just the staff bringing together all the information they have and making a decision on it. MR. SPEAKER: (Mr. Ottenheimer) The hon. the member for St. John's North followed by the hon. gentleman from Stephenville. MR. J. CARTER: I have a question that I would like to address to the Leader of the Opposition. In establishing J1%Y right to place the question - SOME HON • MEMBERS : MR. SPEAKER: MR. J. CARrER: if I may present them. MR. SPEAKER: member. SOME HON. MEMBERS: MR. NEARY: MR. J.

CARI'ER: I have offered citations. MR. NEARY: MR. SPEAKER: MR. NEARY: Oh, oh! Order, please! - I have two citations, Mr. Speaker, I will hear the citations. The hon. Oh, oh! You are out of order. Mr. Speaker has asked me for citations. A point of order, Mr. Speaker. A point of order has come up. Mr. Speaker, I believe Your Honour recognizes the fact that the hon. gentleman is completely out of order. I would like for Your Honour to ask the hon. gentleman to take his seat and not be interrupting and delaying the Oral Question period. MR. J. CARTER: MR. SPEAKER: point of order. On that point of order, Mr. Speaker.

I have to hear the hon. member on the MR. J. CARTER: I would like to present the following two citations. The first one is from Beauchesne, page 131, citation number 357 (jj). It says there, reading from "The traditional restrictions on questions are those listed in Beauchesne's Fourth Edition at citation 171, which is as follows: 'In putting a question a member must confine himself to the narrowest limits.' For instance, 'A question oral or written must 3161

May 10, 1979 Tape 1214 EC - 3 MR. J. CARTER: not: " ( j

j) be addressed to the Leader of the Opposition inquiring the course he intends to adopt ragarding a a question could be addressed to him on some other matter. And then I refer to Standing Orders, page 14, 2S.(a), and here I would suggest that at the very best, Mr. Speaker, they are ambiguous. Standing Orders, 25. (

a) reads: "Questions may be placed on the Order Paper seeking information from the Ministers relating to public affairs; and from other members relating to any Bill, rootion or other public matter connected with the business of the House," and so on. At the very best, I would say, Mr. Speaker, that our own Standing Orders are ambiguous on that point. MR. W, N. HOWE: MR. SPEAKER: (Mr. Ottenheimer) ~IR. W. N. ROWE: Mr. Speaker. The hon. the Leader of the Opposition.

Having listened to the citations made by the hon. member and knowinq how serious the hon. member is to elicit some information from myself concerning some grave problem, I would say, as the Standing Order suggests, why does he not put a question on the Order Paper and I would be glad to look at the question and respond to it at my own - AN HON. MEMBER: verbally? MR. W. N. ROWE: Have you no objection to answering Well, I can answer verbally, but if the hen. member wants to put it on the Order Paper let him do so.

But if he wants to address the question to me, as I was going to say, verbally and orally in the House to save the time of the House 1 I will gladly listen to it in any event. MR. SPEAKER: Actually, the two citations quoted by the hon. the member for St. John's North (Mr. J. Carter), the one from Beauchesne 31\32

May 10, 1979 Tape No. 1215 NM- l MR. SPEAKER (Ottenheime~): Beauchesne does, I concede 1 leave the question open. It is not finally concl~sive that one may not asK a ques~lon of a Leaaer of Lne upposi~ion. Ana L5 \ai,whLcn deals with questions on the Order Paper, does state that questions may be placed on the Order Paper seeking information from the ministers and from other members~ there is a certain ambiguity there. However, I find 31 (

a) dispels the ambiguity 1 because 11 The ordinary daily routine proceeding" Oral Questions" provided in Standing Order 14 shall last not more than thirty minutes, including supplementary questions and points of order. In these periods questions on matters of urgency may be addressed orally to Ministers of the Crown,provided,however,that Mr. Speaker shall disallow what he considers ••to be unparliamentary, etc. So that seems to be a quite specific and restrictive statement.

It does not say that questions may not be asked of others than ministers, but it does say thatOral Questions may be asked of ministers and moz:e or less full stop. So I can certainly see where an han. member might ask a question of the Leader of the Opposition in a speech in that the han. member would be making and another person might reply 1 but I do not see provision for it under Oral Questions. MR. J. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, could I just - MR. SPEAKER: As an explanation of my ruling. MR. J. C.!'.RTER: Just to clarify your ruling. MR. w. ROWE: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. w.

ROWE: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: A point of order. MR. w. ROWE: Obviously, as the han. member has known from the past,it is no disinclination on any member who is making 31.G3

May 10, 1979 Tape No. 1215 NM - 2 MR. W. ROWE: a speech ever to answer a question from anyone in the House, Mr. Speaker.

But I must say, Sir, that it would be a very dangerous precedent for us to start in this House now if we were to allow backbenchers on the government side, or anyone on the government side 1 to start questioning whether it is the Leader of the Opposition or any other member of the Opposition 1 and thereby set a precedent which could risk depriving the Opposition of its undoubted right under the rules to ask Ministers of the Crowr,- ;;e have a half an hour ever day, Sir - and if we allow members of the government side of the House in the backbenches to be asking q~estions to this side of the House, Sir, it could very easily destroy - MR.

LUNDRIGAN: Have a separate Question Period for it . MR. W. ROWE: - it could very easily destroy that half an hour, Sir, and confuse it and therefore we would not be providing the public function which we have. This side of the House would gladly, Sir, consent - MR. NEARY: MR. W. ROWE: We are not in a decision making role. We are not in a position where we make decisions or formulate policy,to put into effect immediately, Mr.

Speaker, but I would say this, that I would agree with the han. the House Leader opposite or the Premier, I am sure I speak for my colleagues on this side, if they want to put another half an hour in every day as a Question Period whereby members of the government can ask members of the Opposition questions 1 I would certainly consent to that. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. W. ROWE: That would require a change to the rules, Sir.

But we cannot consent to any deviation from the Standing Orders now or any setting of precedents which could deprive us, Sir, of our right to ask questions for half an hour of Ministers of the Crown. It is a public duty, Sir, which we must fulfill and we cannot allow any frittering away, Sir. That is my point of order. MR. J. CARTER: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The han. member for St. John's North . 31G4

l1a y 10, 1979 Tape No . 1215 MR. J. CARTER: Mr. Spea.'<er, abouc cicaeion 31 (a )1 surely what is not prohibited in our Standing Orders is allowed. )JR. st>EAKER COteenheimer) : Order, please ! I have never accepced that kind of interprecation. There are many matters no!: specifically prohibiced a.~~ one can c~nk of numerous dramatic and even of various natures, but that does not mean they tr.ay be perfo~ed in the House. It would be a most dangerous ruling if ! were to say what is not specifically prohibitec.! may· ioe done he re . So I think I could not he a::: the hon. gentleman's opinion ::.here.

Ti:ne for one further ~uestion , The hon . member for Stephenville I have recognized . ;1!!.. HCNE:IL: ~ . Spe~'<er , my question is to ~~e Miniscer of 11unicipaJ. ~fairs and Housing. When t!le announced closi:'lg of the Labrador Li:terboa.rd was made i :: Stephenville, t:he Newfoundland a.~d Labrador Housing urAer t:he Harmon Complex stated ~~at a r ental subsidy would apply co all units on the Complex according to che fam.ily income.

Could the ministe:: indicate co this Rouse i f the subsidy •.u.ll sciJ.l apply to senior citizens and co peop l e who are presencly livi:'lg on ~~e Complex who find themselves in a tow income brackec? Will that subsidy still apply? 31.65

May 10, 1979 Tape 1216 PK- 1 MR. SPEAKER (MR. OTTENHEIMER): The han. Minister of Municipal Affairs and Rousing. MR. N. WINDSOR: ' Mr. Speaker, government has a programme whereby senior citizens in many areas of the Province can receive subsidies in certain units. That prograrnme,of course,is in place. The programme the han. gentleman is referring to is a special subsidy that was put in there on the closing of the Labrador Linerboard. The demand for those units now is greatly reduced.

A large number of the people who were initially involved have moved away and we see that the requirement for the continuation of that programme has decreased tremendously. So we are reviewing it. No decision has been made up to this point in time, but certainly it is not going to be expanded to include anybody whowasnot included in the original programme. MR. MARSRl\LL: MR. SPEAKER: MR. F. ROWE: ORDERS OF THE DAY Order 13. Order 13, the adjourned debate o~ Bill No. 15. The hon. member for Trinity-Bay de Verde. Mr. Speaker, I believe I have a few more moments at my disposal to speak to Bill No. 15.

Sir, yesterday the Premier made two remarks, two observations,mainly,in his speech on the sale of the Linerboard mill and the conversion of the Linerboard mill to a newsprint mill, two observations, and two admissions. Two observations were that there were two mistakes made. The first mistake, Sir, that the Premier referred to was the decision to put the Linerboard mill in Stephenville in the first place. Now, Sir, I categorically deny and dismiss that hypothesis or that reasoni~g on the part of the Premier, that it was a mistake to put the Linerboard mill in Stephenville in the first place.

Everybody can well remember, Sir, can well remember the fact that the government of the day had a very serious problem on its hands, not of its own doing. One, there was the intention to set up a linerboard mill in this Province using wood from Labrador. The problem, Sir, was that at the same time, around the 3166

May 10, 1979 Tape 1216 PK - 2 Mr. F. Rowe: same time the Americans decided to move out of Stephenville leaving thousands of people unemployed, therefore, Sir, the Premier himself 1 ~f the day, went to Happy Valley-Goose Bay area, and it was well documented on CBC television, went to Goose Bay-Happy Valley area and in a four or a five hour speech convinced the people of Labrador in that area of the necessity for putting the mill in the Stephenville area in order to solve a serious economic problem caused by the Amercians moving out of that area.

And as I mentioned yesterday, Sir, or the day before, there has been no proof nor any documentation to indicate that that Linerboard mill would have failea, but nonetheless it was taken over by the government. If it had to fail, Sir, it has been mentioned by han. members on this side, if it had to fail it would have cost this Province far less if it had gone into receivership than it has cost as a result of the government's takeover of that mill.

So I dismiss completely the hypothesis or the suggestion on the part of the Premier, and for years on the part of members opposite,that it was a blunder made by the previous administration with respect to the location of that mill. I dismiss it completely, Sir. I will agree that there were two mistakes made. And the Premier himself, Sir, has admitted mistake number one.

So number two mistakeJwhich I categorize now as mistake number one, mistake number two was in government trying to run an industrial enterprise of that magnitude, given the fact that government had very little experience,and in running linerboard mills, none at all, So that was the second big mistake. Premier yesterdQy. These are the words of the The Premier, Sir, and I might add that for years we have heard han. members opposite deny that the takeover of the Linerboard mill was a mistake. They talked about what a great achievement it was.

During this present debate over the past two weeks three ministers opposite and two members opposite have talked about what a great move it was on the part of that administration to 3io7

May 10, 1979 Tape 1216 PK - 3 Mr. F. Rowe: takeover the Linerboard mill. And yesterday, Sir, to the amazement, the utter amazement _ I was flabbergasted, I was almost bowled over when the hon. Premier stood in his place and argued against his own colleagues 1 what they have been saying over the past three or four years, and what they have been saying during the debate on this bill. Namely, he has admitted that this administrations taking over the Linerboard mill was a mistake, they had no business getting into whatsoever. It is unbelievable, Sir. Unbelievable! So the placement of the mill was not a mistake, Sir.

We will never know whether it was a mistake, because Canadian Javelin never had an opportunity to see whether it could have been a success or not. If it had gone into bankruptcy or receivership, Sir, we would have lost, say, $40,000 or $50,000, we would not have lost the $400 million that we have lost as a , result of the two major blunders of this administration in1 number one 1 taking over the Linerboard mill, and number two,shutting her down. As a matter of fact, Sir, this administration is responsible for two major mistakes, two major blunders. The Premier would not admit the third mistake.

I rejected the first mistake that he talked about, I support his second mistake, but he conveniently forgot to mention the third mistake, and that was the close jown of the Linerboard mill itself, Sir. The close down of the Linerboard mill after utter and complete and dismal failure in the government attempting to run the Linerboard mill that first blunder, that first mistake,they then decided to close her down. In order to do what, Sir? Supposedly save the Province $20 million to $30 million per year, as quoted by the Premier on Tuesday, $20 million to $30 million.

The taxpayers of Newfoundland started having to pump $20 million to $30 million into that enterprise. for closing her.down. That was the reason Sir, during questioning over the last few years we asked han. members opposite why they had to close down that Linerboard mill? Was it true that they really closed it down because they were

May 10, 1979 Tape 1216 PK - 4 Mr. F. Rowe: forcedto close it down upon the advice of their financial advisors, their fiscal advisors, that our credit rating might drop if we continued to operate that mill? 31G9

May 10,1979 Tape No. 1217 AH-1 MR.F.ROWE: ------- To a person, Sir, members opposite denied outright that the Linerboard mill was closed down because of advice ~rom the fiscal agents relating to the fact that the credit rating of this Province might be damaged by continuing to operate the Linerboard mill. Yet over the last few days, Sir, we have heard two hon. members, three hon. members opposite ~penly admit that one of the reasons for closing do~~ the Linerboard mill was that if we did not it would have affected our credit rating.

And one hon. member went so far as to say that it would have put the Province into bankruptcy if the Linerboard mill was not closed down.

Now, Sir, I submit that hon. members opposite have grossly misled and deceived the people of this Province in not admitting the real reason for the closing down of the Linerboard mill in the first place, and they have grossly deceived and misled the people of the Province in saying that it was an achievement to take eve~ the Linerboard mill when the Premier of this Province years later, the now Premier of this Province, admits - and he was a part of the administration,if not in the Cabinet he was certainly high up in the backbenches and eventually in the Cabinet and now he is Premier, he was a part of this deception and this misleading of the people of this Province in not admitting that even from day one it was a mistake for this government to take over the Linerboard mill.

But, Sir, the second tragedy, ~~e second blunder, the second mistake can go right back to the PC administration once again and 31.'('0

May 10, 1979 Tape No. 1218 ow - 1 MR. F. ROWE: thaticis the close down of the· mill. Now I got off track there because I started to mention that they were closina it down in order to save $20 million or $30 million a year. Now, Sir, everybody who has his head screwed on the righ~ way realizes that this Province has lost far more than $20 million or $30 million a year in the moth­ ~ balling of that mill.

Maybe not $20 million or $30 million in direct interest payments th.e hon. members opposite can grin all they want to but if the hon. members opposite were living in Stephenville, one of the 2,000 people who were told one day,'I am sorry, no work for yoc~boys, we are mothballing her AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) MR. F.

ROWE: - and they had to go, Sir, to Alberta, Saudi Arabia, other parts of Canada, parts of the United States, and the world, othercparts of this Province, sell their houses at extremely depreciated prices, disrupt their whole social milieu completely, 2,000 peOple; and then when the linerboard mill opens again perhaps these very same individuals who lived and grew up in Stephenville all their lives have to come back now after selling their property at depreciated values, and try to buy back that same property at appreciated values.

I submit, to, Your Honour, that this blunder, the close down of the linerboard mill has cost this Province directly and indirectly far more than would have been the case if they had kept the thing rolling. So, two mistakes, Sir, mistake number one, the takeover of the mill by the P.C. administration and mistake number two,the shut-down of the mill. And, now, Sir, they are asking us to support a bill,which we will support in principle.wit~ all of its detailed faults. We support the bill in principle because it means jobs, it means employment, it means a livelihood for the 3171

May 10, 1979 Tape No. 1218 DW - 2 MR. F. ROWE: people of the Bay St. George and Stephenville area. We do support the principle of the bill. But, the government, Sir, has made two monumental blunders, they made a complete shemozzle of the whole situation. If they had to have left the liner­ board mill where is and as is.. the worst that could have happened is that it could have gone bankrupt and gone into receivership and the Province would have lost some millions of dollars 7 but not the some $400 million that was lost as a result of the takeover and the close down of this mill.

Now, Sir, I do not know how much time I have left but I believe it is only a few minutes. The Premier on Tuesday, Sir, and I would like to read back into the record of this House I wish he was in his seat to reply to this or maybe some other hon. minister or member will reply to it. In closing the debate on the bill I hope the Minister of Industrial Development (Mr. Maynard) will answer the charges or the statements made by the Premier on Tuesday. And I will read, Sir, from the record, "For whatever reasons there was a lot of, I agree, inefficiency in the operation." This was when the government took it over. MR.

F. ROWE: "Not only at Stephenville but more particularly in Happy Valley and Goose Bay area:' Now listen to this one, Sir, "A lot of loggers from the district of Green Bay worked in Happy Valley-GOose Bay and they used to come back home Christmastime and sometimes in the Summer when there was a slow down and tell some wild''- Mr. Speaker, what is the racket? Mr.

Speaker, listen to this, this is coming from the Premier now, the member for Green Bay district, His constituents usedto come back and tell some wild and woolly stories about the wonderful life they were• having in Happy Valley -GOose Bay and 1.you know, that they could get paid almost as much or 100re there than they could if when to work - I cannot understand the grammer of the Premier but this is the way it is recorded - if they were working with Price or 31'i'2

May 10, 1979 Tape No. 1219 GH-1 MR. F. ROWE: Bowaters near at horne and they did not have to cut near the amount of wood and yet got paid just as much for themselves, Mr. Speaker. There was lots of efficiency in the system - no question. This is corning from the hon. the Premier from his own constituents and, Sir, I ask the han. Premier knowing that at the time, knowing that at the time, what did the Premier do about it? What did the Premier do about it? MR. FLIGHT: Nothing. MR. F.

ROWE: As the member for Green Bay, coming from his own constituents, knowing that there were all kinds of inefficiencies, people were having wild and woolly times, gala times, these are words coming from the Premier, what did the Premier do about it as t~he member for the district? MR. w. ROWE: "Go to it", he said. MR. F. ROl-lE: Did he say, "Go to it"? MR. w. ROw'E: Rip-off . MR. F. ROWE: Did he go to the cabinet,or the Premier of the day and report this? Did he ask for an investigation? Was there an investigation? If there was an investigation, what were the results of the investigation?

What actions were taken? Does the government care, Sir? I cannot believe, Sir, that we have a Premier of a Province in this day and age who openly admits that there was gross inefficiency, gross inefficiency .• people were having a wild and woolly time, a gala time, his own constituents telling him this and he did not take any actions. At least the han. the Premier has not yet indicated what actions he took. I suggest, Mr.

Speaker, it was incumbent upon the then member and now member for Green Bay and now Premier, it was incumbent upon that Premier, that individual as a member of this House of Assembly, to have reported this directly to the Premier or directly to the cabinet and if no action was taken to have brought it on the floor of this House, because that is

part 31/'3 •'

lo'.ay 10, 1979 '!'ape No . 1219 GH-2 MR. E'. ROl-lE: of the reason, Sir, or par~ of the place where millions o f dollars of the ta xpayers ' money was was~ed.

Sir, it is L~~edible! ! do not know wr.at che hon . the Premie r is trying to ? rove in che ~ouse of l'lssembly, Sir , whether he is 1:ryinc; co c r eate an image of che good quy, crying to sweep everyth~ng clean or what 1 but for him to fly straight in the face of what all ocher hon . members have be~~ saying over the past three or four or five years wi~~ regards to the Linerboard miLl and to disclose chat: there was gross inefficiency reve a~ed to him so~e years ago ar.d we only find out now1 when he becomes Premier, from his ow~ mouth in debate on this bill chat he was aware of it and nothing was done about it , I find quite incredibl e, quite incredible!

So, Sir, someboCy has to answer for it opposite . If there were investigations, I for one would like to know what the result s and the retx>rts of these investigations were and I would Like to see the~ tabled on the f loor of this House of Assembly . So, Sir, there ~·ou qo. The gove-rnment stands accused. The gove~~ent is guilty of massi ve and gross , almo st indecent, dece p tion and misleading of the people o f this Province, because chey col= the people of this Province for years that the reason for the takeover or the shutt ing down of che Li.nerboard mill 3174

May 10, 1979 Tape No . 1220 GH-1 MR. F. ROWE: was the fact that it was not economically feasible to operate, and they denied for years that there was no connec- did not do so it might adversely affect the credit rating of this Province. The question was put to them hundreds of times, !-i..r. Speaker. "No, no, no", was the answer every time. No, an absolute no, nothing to do with it. The reason it was closed down is because it was inefficient to operate. Haybe so, but the inefficiency was under the ownership of this govern­ ment and admitted by the Premier just two days ago. so - MR. SPEAKER: (Mr.

Cross) Order, please! MR. F. ROWE: I think Mr. Speaker is trying to tell me my time is up. MR. SPEAKER: MR. F . ROWE: Your time has expired. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So, just in closing, Sir, I simply reiterate that we do support the principle of the bill although there are certain obvious weaknesses in it and we certainly take issue with the two monumental blunders by this administration in the handling of this whole affair. MR. SPEAKER: If the han. minister speaks now, he closes the debate. The hon. minister. MR. MAYNARD: Mr.

Speaker, I do not think anyone can accuse the government at this point in time of trying to stifle the debate on the Linerboard bill. We have been at it for two weeks or close to two weeks and han. members should be at least satisfied that they at least had a chance to debate the subject that they have been saying for the last six or seven years they never had a chance to debate. In closing remarks I would like to - I do not know how many pages of scribbles and notes and what-not I have here but there are quite a few. I would like to relate to a few of the remarks that have been made by people opposite.

I am still not .- 31.7 5

May 10, 1979 Tape No. 1220 GH-2 MR. MAYNARD: sure after listening to the debate for four or five days whether the Opposition supports the principle in one sentence some hon. member will say that they support the bill in principle and in another sentence they will say that the government made horrendous mistakes and that theJ;"e "ere inefficiencies, there were various other acts that were undertaken by government that were illegal or alleged to be illegal or whatever, so it is pretty hard to decipher exactly what is being said. MR.

MARSHALL: The hon. minister might - I believe they called it a bad deal for a start. MR. MAYNARD: That is right. MR. F. B. ROWE: But it was the Premier who said that there were gross inefficiencies. MR. MAYNARD: They have called it a very bad deal on a number of occasions. I believe all with the exception of three members on the other side, that each of one of them as they stood in their place called it a very bad deal, the deal that we are now making with Abitibi Price. Mr.

Speaker, you know the facts and the figures and the history and everything else related to the Linerboard situation, the Stephenville facility has been related over and over in this House of Assembly or in various other forums over the years. It is well documented what the problems were and it is well documented as to why government at that point in time, in 1972, felt it was necessary to take over the Stephenville facility, And I agree MR.

NEARY: MR. ~YNARD: (Inaudible) more time in the storage pot. -and I agree with the Premier that looking back at it from a point seven years ago, looking back in retrospect, that it was a mistake at that time to take over the facility. But in 1972, Mr. Speaker, we did not realize that it was going to turn 3176

May 10, 1979 Tape No. 1220 GH-3 out as it did and '"hat we were trying to do was make t!le !:>est of a bad situation. I !lliqht ?Oi nt out that. at that time. Mr. Speaker, t:he Opposition :nembers Eully ag:eed •.rith the takeover of the Linerboard facility from C~~adian Javelin Limited . 50:1£ I!ON. ME!13ERS: No way. M.R. MA YNA:W: E'ully aqreed, Mr. Speaker, fully agreed, and I would like to make some quotes from Hansard by the prese~t Leader of the Opposition and the former Leader of the Opposition. 3177

May 10, 1979 Tape 1221 EC - 1 MR. MAYNARD: On May 4, 1972, Mr. Speaker: "The government was in the same position as the present administration were when they took office; and the oovermnent t.i'u•n t:-:--:-1<: ~e ea.:::e decision as the present administration, namely, that there was no alternative but to continue the construction of that great mill in spite of the escalation in costs. It was under these agreements, Sir, containing Canadian Javelin's guarantee - the parent company - under these agreements that the hon. Leader of the Opposition and I" - this was Mr.

Rowe speaking, the present Leader of the Opposition - "the hon. Leader of the Opposition and I threatened and were planning towards the takeover of the project by the then government in December and January of the year just past." That was December of 1971 and January of 1972 in the last days of the previous administration.

Another quote on May 4th, again from the present Leader of the Opposition: "It was about this time, December and January, that the Leader of the Opposition and I, including, I believe, my colleague here tonight, who were present then, felt that we had without a shadow of a doubt, after six or seven months of fooling around, of getting nowhere with the Javelin people, getting nowhere with Mr.

Doyle, decided we had reached the end of the line and that a takeover of the project by government could not be avoided either by negotiation or otherwise." Another quote from May 4, 1972: "But, Sir, in the present case, under the present circumstances, the Javelin people seemed to have lost all interest in this project to a very great degree even before we left office, either because of the reduced profit potential or the lack of success in providing efficient management themselves, or maybe because of all the political fuss and co1111110tion, or maybe because of a possible drag of this project on Canadian Javelin's other interests, or a combination of all these factors.

In these circumstances, Sir - in all these circumstances, it is our view on this side" - the Opposition side in 1972, Mr. Speaker, "that the government takeover of the project is the best thing to do in the circumstances. " 317'8

May 10, 1979 Tape 1221 EC - 2 MR MAYNARD: Now, Mr, Speaker, these were words from the Opposition in 1972 when the government took over the facility at ~~~~hRnvil1e. There has been ~uite a chanqe in tone since that time. MR. NEA..~: Do you want the other side of the story? MR. MAYNARD: I :night point out to the hon. the member for Trini~y - Bay de Verde (Mr. F. Rowe) MR. NEARY: story? MR. SPEAKER: (Mr. Cross) MR. MAYNARD: Do you want the other side of the Order, please! Mr. Speaker, the hon, gentleman from LaPoile (Mr.

Neary) had ample opportunity and he shouted enough and made enough of accusations and charges while he was up on his feet, and I would like for him to let me speak without interruption. MR. SIN_MONS: MR. SPEAKER: a right to be heard in silence. MR. MAYNARD: Answer the changes. Order, please! The hon. minister has The hon. minister. Another quote from the Leader of the Opposition from May 4, 1972, Mr.

Speaker: "Obviously, Sir, what the government already have put into the project and are going to put into the project, together with the taking on of certain obligations of the project is sufficient consideration and sufficient reason for a takeover of this project without any reference whatsoever to the SS million." And that was the $5 million that we had agreed to pay Javelin for what was considered to be their input into the total operation. The hon, the member for Burgeo - Bay d'Espoir (Mr. Simmons) said at one point in time that it should have never left the hands of private enterprise. MR.

NEARY: That is right. MR. MAYNARD: Now, Mr. Speaker, you have to ask the very simple question, What private enterprise? Canadian Javelin had not invested any money into the facility as such. Canadian Javelin had put all the money into the facility simply by walking around Europe with an 31.7•9

May 101 1979 Tape 1221 EC - 3 MR. MAYNARD: o.rder in Council produced by the previous administration authorizing them to raise any and all monies they desired for the construction of a line:tboard mill at Stephenville. MR. NEARY: That is not true. MR. MAYNARO: That is true, Mr. Speaker, it is ab:;10lutely true, and we have the original Order in Council that ga.ve them the right t.o do that. MR. NEARY: MR, MAYNARD: enterprise 1 Mr. Speaker. MR. NEARY: MR. MAYNARD: $3.0 million. It was never in the hands of private I beg your pardon, it was.

It was in the hands of an agent who was being financed totally by the people of Newfoundland and that is not private enterprise. And it is obvious from the COIII!Dellts that were made by the Opposition 111embers at t;hat time that they were not very happy with the whole situation in the dying days of the last 31.80

May 10, 1979, Tape 1222, Page 1 -- apb MR. MAYNARD : administration and they were of the opinion that it had to be taken over and that it had to be run by government, it had to be constructed by government. MR. NEARY: MR. MAYNARD: No way! No way! The hon. member says, 'no way'. Refer back to the Hansards of May 4, 1972; it is all there, Mr. Speaker. MR. NEARY: MR. MAYNARD: MR. NEl1.RY: MR. MAYNARD: Did I say that? It is all there. Did I say anythiilg? The hon. member was part of the Opposition at that time and his leader was speaking on his behalf. MR. POWER: 'Billy' is not going to be for long though. MR.

MAYNARD: And obviously, he went along with it. Now,Mr. Speaker, to try to answer all the accusations that are made by the hon. the member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) is impossible under any circurnstances 1 because the hon. member does not make direct and specific accusations, he makes innuendoes about certain things, sort of dark,mysterious papers or documents that he comes up with from time to time and then, of course, tries to create an aura of mystery and criminal charges and criminal matters in various instances.

He never comes up with any specific things that can be looked into or that we can find any documentation on. MR. NEARY: Well, do you want me to give you what you are looking for? MR. MAYNARD : MR. NEARY: MR. MAYNARD: 31.8:1 The hon. member - Here. If the hon. member has

May 10, 1979, Tape 1222, Page 2 -- apb HR . ~!AYNARD : some thing he can ~ut it on the table o: the House, Mr . Speaker. MR. NEARY: Mr . Speaker, the other day when I was ma.Kl.ng some oi dt~::.~ charge s and accusations I said I had testimony that was presented to ~~e United States court and the hon. gentleman i s now inviting me to put it on the table of the House . Rere, I will put it on the tabl e of the House and let everybody have a look at it . SOME HON. MEMBERS: ~1R. !-1AYNARD: doubt by Mr . John C. Doyle. r-<.R. NE~Y: Rig.ht ! MR. ~!AYNA..'ID: no doub t , Hr. Speak.er . MR . NEARY: the story. HR .

MAYNARD: MR. NEARY : Hear, hear! Testimony no Tha t is correct. Very good testimony, The other side of Very good testimony . Take it and read it. MR. MAYNARD: ~lr. Doyle does not have th e guts to come back to Canada and make those accusations,does he? M.'q • NEARY : r cannot speak for him but I can vouch for the testimony. MR. HAYNARD: You know, the hon. member was pointing out that the - MR. t-!ARSHA.LL: May I rise on a point of order? MR. HAYNARD: Sure. MR. ~qsR.~L: Mr.Speaker, I raise this point of order and Your Honour may wish to take it unde r advisement . The hon . the member for LaPoile (Mr.

Neary ) has chosen to tab le evidence from his 31.32

May 10., 1979, Tape 1222, Page 3 -- apb MR. MARSHALL: host in Panama, Mr. Doyle. Mr. Doyle also happens to be a fugitive from justice from the Province. I do not bel1eve 1t 1s appropr1ate tor a iug1tive from justice to have his testimony tabled before this House itself. We have no objection, if the hon. the member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) wishes to distribute it to the press, if he wishes to convey Mr. Doyle's message to the people of Newfoundland himself 1 to the press himself. I do not believe it is in order, Mr.

Speaker, for a fugitive from justice in this Province to have any rights whatsoever to table anything, to have any of his information tabled in this House. MR. NEARY: To that point of order, Mr. Speaker, please. Mr. Speaker, first of all let me say that that was not a point of order, Sir, that the testimony that I just laid on the table of the House did not come from Mr. Doyle, it came from the United States District Court in New York. The seal of the court is on the testimony.

I cannot vouch for whether or not the testimony is right or wrong, whether it is true or false I cannot vouch for that, but I can vouch for the fact that it was testimony given to the United States court. MR. R. MOORES: MR. NEARY: MR. R. MOORES: MR. NEARY: Under oath. Under oath. That is right. And I sent for the testimony to New York, and I was invited by the minister to lay it on the table of the House which I have done. Now it is up to Your Honour to decide whether or not it is admissible to do that in this House. It has never been done before. 3183

Nay 10, 1979, Tape 1222, Page 4 -- apb MR. MARS HALL: Well, if the hon. member says it is from the United States court, why does the hon. gentleman not invite his host to come up here and give his testimony before this court? MR. NEARY: Mr. Speaker, that is not for me to do, Sir . I am not in a position to do that . The hon. gentleman should ask the question of the gentleman to whom he is referring and not of me . I can only say, Mr.

Speaker, to the poir.t ~f order that I am very conce r ned about this testimony and b,e effect it could have on the credit rating of L~is Province, the effect that it could have on developers anc businessmen corning into this Province . If I were hon. members,! would not use any more diversionary tactics; I would read that testimony, read it, and get the other side of the story . SO~~ HON . ~MBERS: Hear, hear! MR. MARSHALL: Now, Mr .

Speaker, this was raised as a serious point of order and I suggest that Your Honour may wish to take it under advisement for the purpose of determining whether or not this material should be tabled in this aouse. As I say, we have no objections 3:1.84

May 10, 1979 Tape No. 1223 MR. MARSHALL: if the hon. member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) wishes to convey any messages he wants to the people Newfoundland, through any media he wishes to carry it, but not through the medium of this House, the House of the people of Newfoundland, to convey informa~ion from a fugitive from the justice of this Province. NM - l MR. NEARY: To that point of order, Sir. The hon. gentleman can call Mr. Doyle whatever he wants, he can call him whatever he wants, a criminal, a fugitive from justice or anything else.

But the fact remains, Sir, that this testimony was given to a United States Court and I believe the House is entitled to have it because it is of such a serious nature. And the hon. gentleman can continue to attack me personally, use all the diversionary tactics that he wishes,and the hon. gentleman I believe, Sir, is afraid that the other side of the story, the truth, may come out. Because there has been a travesty of justice in this whole matter,and if the hon. gentleman was not afraid of it the hon. gentleman would let it rest on the table of the House and let the chips fall where they may. MR.

MARSHALL: This House is not to be used, Mr. Speaker, by persons who are fugitives from justice and I am ashamed that a member of this House would be a messenger to deliver the evidence from a fugitive of justice. Now the point is I raised this as a legitimate point of order. There is certain freedom in this House for the tabling of anything 1 and I have not researched it 1 but I think it is utterly abhorent to the people of this Province that the people's House should be used to table testimony or statements from a fugitive from justice of this Province and I ask Your Honour to take it under advisement. 31.85

May 10, 1979 Tape No. 1223 NM - 2 MR. NEARY: To that point of order again, Mr. Speaker. The hen. gentleman has said, "delivered by a messenger." abundantly clear to the House. I went to the United States Court to get certain information and certain documentation in connection with the oil refinery at Come By Chance and I discovered, Mr. Speaker, in the process of doing that tlli"t there were all kinds of evidence of wrongdoing on the part of the administration in that testimony that I got in connection with the oil refinery from the District Court in New York. Now I find, Mr.

Speaker, in the latest testimony that I have gotten from the courts in New York, I find now all kinds of evidence of wrongdoing again and my hen. friend, the minister who is speaking, the Minister of Industrial Development (Mr. Maynard) said that I was making innuendoes and accusations. Well,I was not, Sir. I was not. I could not lay any direct charges. I could not make any direct charges. I kept referring to the testimony in the New York Court and I said at that time, Mr. Speaker, as soon as I received the te~timony from the New York Court I would table it in the House.

And the hen. gentleman invited me to do so today and that is what I have done. I will stand by the fact that the evidence has been given under oath to a branch of the district court in Columbia in New York and that is it. I cannot vouche for the fact whether the information is true or false. That is not my job, Sir. I am not supposed to do that. And so I laid the information on the table of the House and I am sure Your Honour will decide to leave it there because that is where it should be. Members should have access to that testimony that is being circulated throughout the United States.

And there are 20,000 shareholders in this company. Mr. Doyle is only one shareholder, there are 20,000 shareholders in 3156

Nay 10, 1979 Tape No . 1223 NM - 3 ~lR . EJ>.RY: this company that have been crucified by this governme~t and it is about time the other s1ae or cne ~ory was to~d ana c~e non . gencl~n seems co ee af:::aid that the truth may come out. MR. }IARSHALL : The r e is only one of them that is a fugitive from justi~e, and only one of that is positioned down in ?anama because he cannot be here co extend his hospitality to the hon . member. MR . NEARY: i-!r .

Speaker, r would sup with the devil to see that justice is done in this case ~1d wrongdoing was brought up into the light of day and I intend co do it and ~~y sl rs or any innuendoes or any smears on r.he part of the ~on . gentleman will not stop me :rom trying to bring the truth out into the light of day. M..'\. SPEAKER (Cross): Order, please ~ ! think ! have heard enough dialogue at ~~is point in time. I will not make a ruling right no.r but I will reserve my ruling for a la:::er date. I would make a bet , l1r. Speaker , that Mr .

Doyle did not personally give the evidence to the district court in New York since he is also wanted in :::he United States. ~lR . NEARY: l-!R. SPEJ..l<2R: MR. N£.o.RY: A point oi orde~. A point of order has been ra~sed. Unlike the cou~ts in Newfoundland, Sir, 3:187

May 10, 1979 MR. NEARY: travel. MR. NEARY: MR. MARSHALL: MR. NEARY: Tape 1224 EC - 1 courts in the United States do Oh, absolutely. (Inaudible) • And the Securities Commission, as hon. members will see from this testimony, did go to Panama, the Securities Commission. MR. MORGAN: the court sure. MR. NEARY: MR. MORGAN: MR. NEARY: now is the expert. MR. MORGAN: MR. BRETT: MR. MORGAN: MR. MARSHALL: point of order? MR. NEARY: The Securities Commission is not It is a branch of the cow::t. (Inaudible) is no such thing. I beg your pardon! The han. gentleman (Inaudible) • What is he speaking on?

A point of order, is he not? Sit down, boy. On the point of order - is this a Excuse me, Your Honour, the hon. gentleman does not understand the situation - I was speaking to a point of order, Sir - that this was a case of the Securities Commission, a case going on in the court, the Securities Commission versus Canadian Javelin, a delisted Canadian Javelin, for various and sundry reasons including late filings and so forth. MR. R. MOORES: That is right. MR. NEARY: This is a court thing. MR. MORGAN: What is the point of order? MR. MARSHALL: There is no point of order. Sit down. MR.

NEARY: The hon. gentleman did not understand and I wanted to clarifv that situation. MR. SPEAKER: (Mr. Cross) Order, please! There is no point of order. I will ask the hon. minister to continue. MR, MAYNARD: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. 31.88

May 10, 1979 Tape 1224 EC - 2 MR. ~NARD: Now, to continue on, I would like to say, Mr. Speaker, that if that evidence is given by Mr. Doyle, which it obviously is, r .do nPt think it is going to s~nd.~ny ~hiVP.rs up the spine of anyone in this administration or the administration before. SOME liON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. MAYNARD: I think Mr. Doyle 1 s record and his past are well known and I am sure anyone who takes him seriously in any evidence that we might give to a travelling court in the United States - MR. SPEAKER: (Mr.

Ottenheimer) If the hon. minister would permit for just a DJJment, I now have to inform hon. members what matters will come up for debate at 5:30 P.M. I have received notice of one matter from the hon. the member for LaPoile (Mr. Neary) concerning a question asked the Acting Premier, the subject matter being lobster prices. MR. MARSHALL: Before you (inaudible) , MR. SPEAKER: The hon, the Minister of Municipal Affairs (Mr. N. Windsor), actually, is indicated as well. MR. MARSHALL: Before you ask the hon. minister to return to the debate, Mr.

Speaker, perhaps I may at this appropriate time, move that the House when it does adjourn this afternoon, stand adjourned until tomorrow morning and that the hours from lOzOO A.M. to 1:00 P.M. be substituted for the normal sitting times of 3:00 P.M. to 6:00 P.M. Motion, that the House at its rising do stand adjourned until tomorrow, Friday, May 11, 1979 at 10:00 A.M. , carried. The hon. minister. MR. MAYNARD: Mr. Speaker, I will not take too much longer to close off the debate. AN HON. MEMBER: You have not started it. MR.

MAYNARD: Well, whether I have started it or not, there has been a fair amount of discussion going on throughout this debate, My colleagues on this side of the House have outlined the situation verv well and have answered most of the questions, I think. 31.89

May 10, 1979 Tape 1224 EC - 3 MR. MAYNARD: I would like to refer to one comment my colleague, the Minister of Mines and Energy (Mr. Doody) made when he s~d ! t ..:p ·.;e.rt r .. ic-elz·, I ~c.!.ie•-e, i.u speaki:1g L'"'l ~e de.=;a.t.a. MR. SPEAKER: (Mr. Ottenheimer) Order, please! I have to make a slight oorrection on the announcement of the matters to be debated this evening. Notice was given by the same hon. member arising from a question asked the Premier, but the subject matter now deals with blowouts and tbe possibility of a major oil spill. The hon. minister. AN HON. MEMBER: Are there two ques~ions1 MR.

DOODY: One. Lobsters are out, oil is in. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. MAYNARD: I must say, Mr. Speaker, it is a bit of a problem keeping continuity in this situation. The Stephenville facility, Mr. Speaker, no one can deny the fact that it was an albatross around the neck of government, but we did not try to create that albatross. We believed, probably in our naivety in 1972, that we could take that mill, the facility at Stephenville, that we could probably try to do something with it, we could make it work.

Unfortunately, that did not happen, and there were a number of factors, a number of reasons why that did not happen. The hon. the member for Trinity - Bay de Verde (Mr. F. Rowe) pointed out that the Premier had said that there were inefficiencies. Well, in my opening remarks, Mr. Speaker, I referred to the fact that tbere were a number of reasons why t.\·1e facility could not continue to operate, one of which was some management problems that we had, and these management problems obviously did not take due account of some of the inefficiencies that were going on.

There were other reasons -marketing reasons, the erratic nature of linerboard and the fact that linerboard production has not succeeded anywhere that I am aware of, except where a linerboard facility is owned and operated by the people who actually use the linerboard, in other words, the box plants. 3180

May 10, 1979 Tape No.l225 SD - 1 MR. E • MAYNARD : The charge has been made, directly or indirectly, that the sale to Abitibi Price was sort of fixed before we even had a divestiture committee on the go, that it was already decided that we would sell to Abitibi Price. While it has not been said in so many words that is the impression that has been left. Mr. Speaker, the Divestiture Committee that was set up by Government to try to dispose of that facility after the mill had been closed down did a tremendous amount of work in trying to find a buyer, first of all, for a linerboard facility.

It is my recollection that they solicited bids, They did not receive bids or proposals from all of them but they solicited bids from some thirty-nine different linerboard facilities around the world. Thirty-nine different companies that are in the linerboard business either as manufacturers or as users of linerboard itself. And it became apparent after a few months of looking at the possible reactivation of the linerboard facility that there was just no one intereste<;, there was just no one interested in using it as a linerboard facility. The member for Stephenville (Hr. w. McNeil) pointed out that Hr.

Crosbie, at one point in time> said It was not worth a dollarJ and that is correct. it was not worth a dollar to anyone that we could find as a linerboard facility icself 1 it was, however, worth a substantial amount as a newsprint facility. And it see~r,ed to the Divestiture Committee and the cabinet Committee, who formed the Board of Directors at that point in time, that the best thing to do was to get away from trying to sell it as a linerboard mill and try to find out whether or not we could come up with someone who would change it into a newsprint or a sulphite pulp facility. MR. W.

NCNE IL : (Inaudible) did you not s